Judgment is the result. Conditional propositions
the thought by which something is affirmed or denied. Such a thought, enclosed in a sentence, contains three elements: the subject, the predicate and the link - "is" or "is not" (the words expressing the link are usually not used in Russian).
Great Definition
Incomplete definition ↓
JUDGMENT
one). statement, 2). a mental act expressing the speaker's attitude to the content of the expressed thought C can be true or false Formed by the use of predicative words (expressing properties and relationships). to the object of thought (from an object or a set of them). For example, Tver is located between Moscow and St. Petersburg (true C), 2 is greater than 3 (false C).
All Cs are divided into simple and complex. Simple Cs can be attributive (they express the belonging of a property to an object). or C relations (we are talking about two or more objects, between which there are different relations - more, less, older, to the right, between, etc.). Attributive Cs are divided by quality into affirmative and negative, by quantity - into general, particular and singular. Thus, from the point of view of these two characteristics, attributive Cs are divided into general affirmative, general negative, particular negative, and particular affirmative. There is a division of C according to other signs.
Complex C consist of several. simple, interconnected by the type of conjunctive (through the logical union "and"), disjunctive (through the logical union "or"). or implicative (through the logical union "if, then"). connections In the formation of complex C, one should take into account the logical. the laws of connection between C, expressing the dependence of the truth of some C on the truth (or falsity). others Objective truth (or falsity). C is established either practically or in operations with other Cs. The derivation of one C from others is called inference.
A person gradually masters the ability to build C. Psychological studies have shown that C expressed in language is preceded by forms of thought, in which non-speech means of expression occupy the greatest place (practical actions, indications of a practical situation, gesture science, etc.) . Only by the end of the 3rd year of life, the child begins to express his thoughts about the main relationships between things and events in the form of separate Cs, while the linguistic design of C lags behind its content. Initially, C is a simple, grammatically unrelated combination of words (for example, “elephant tprua”), sometimes even one word (for example, with an implied subject). Along with the process of morphologization of speech, there is a gradual transition to a grammatically formulated sentence. The formation of C is based on a generalization. The correctness of children's C, the degree of their correspondence to reality are directly dependent on the quality of generalizations.
Psychological-ped. observations show that different forms of C do not develop simultaneously. First of all, Cs are formed that state something. Complex Cs, reflecting the multiplicity of dependencies between phenomena, appear later than simple ones and are based on them.
S. is carried out and expressed in the language in the form of a narrative sentence Question sentences, wishes and orders are not S, since the characteristic in terms of truth or falsity is not applicable to them. The question of the discrepancy between linguistic and logical. aspects of considering the structure of the proposal has a great practical. meaning, in particular in the study of grammar So, with grammatical. When analyzing a sentence, it is necessary to separate the features of a word as a member of a sentence from its features as an element. Students should also distinguish between grammatical. and logical. meaning of unions.
Statement (rule, theorem, law). in the form of a complex C, it implies the ability to distinguish in it the necessary and sufficient conditions for qualifying a particular phenomenon on its basis. the same member of the sentence "each of the 2 features is necessary (if one feature is not present, it is impossible to draw a conclusion), but one, taken independently of the other, is not sufficient to classify the member of the sentence as homogeneous members. Only the combination of these features is a sufficient condition for C on the homogeneity of the members of the sentence .
Since in S. all the features discussed above are hidden, the teacher must introduce students to the types of logic. connections in C and teach them to identify logical. grammatical meaning. unions, to understand what conditions are sufficient and necessary. This allows you to outline a certain system of actions for applying C to a specific phenomenon, disciplines the thinking of students.
Lit Davydov VV, Types of generalization in learning, M, 1972, Baranov II, The essence of the learning process, M, 1981, Leon-t s in the Academy of Sciences, Problems in the development of the psyche, M, 19814, Shaporinsky SA, Education and scientific. knowledge, M, 1981, The development of the psyche of schoolchildren in the process of learning activities, M, 1983 A N Zhdan.
Great Definition
Incomplete definition ↓
The main form of mental activity. S. formulates a preliminary result of the thought process. S. is based on an effective character and includes a social aspect. Reflecting the relationship of the subject to the object, S. is emotionally saturated. S. - the result of concepts and ideas. Verification of the truth of S. is carried out in the context of its logical verification, criticality. Such work on S. is reasoning. Reasoning, showing the truth of S., becomes its justification, it reveals the legitimacy of S.'s premises and, thus, takes the form of a conclusion. The main types of S.: affirmative and categorical; problematic, reality and necessary.
JUDGMENT
one of the logical forms of thinking (=> concept; inference). Reflects the relationship between two concepts - subject and predicate. In logic, classifications of judgments are developed. Psychology studies their development as a form of abstract, logical thinking, as well as violations of logical thinking. In the psychological literature, interpretations of the psychological mechanisms underlying the relationship of concepts are given.
JUDGMENT
Judgment) is a generally valid verbal form (statement), thanks to which an abstract universality is given to sensory experience. S. contains the subject in the definition of singularity and in the definition of universality. S. develop in people as a transformed and verbally expressed form of perceptual activity that performs a planning and regulatory role in the overall labor process. S. m. b. It is built on the basis of verbal designations of general ideas, which in the initial period of cognition can be observed and ascertained directly in perception, and then formed in various sign and symbolic systems. A number of private S. about objects can be replaced by a new word-name, the content of which will be a collapsed idea of S. objects. With the help of general ideas and S. produced on their basis, a person can make rather complex conclusions. S. is a direct derivative of the object-sensory activity of people. Generalization in S. is based on the principle of formal, abstract identity and is a feature of empirical thinking. But the knowledge of socialized mankind from the very beginning acquired rational form, therefore, sensory data appear in the process of cognition in the form C, and an individual, guided by social needs, relatively unselfishly highlights the objective properties of objects, and also takes into account the opinions and judgments of others; of people. See Attributive, Knowledge.
JUDGMENT
1. In general - the process of forming an opinion or conclusion based on available material, as well as the prevailing opinion or conclusion. 2. Hypothetical mental faculty, the function of which is to derive such a judgment. This meaning is found only in older works. 3. In logic, a statement about the relationship between symbols in the form of a sentence. 4. Critical evaluation of some thing, event or person. 5. In psychophysics, a decision regarding the presence or absence of a signal or an assessment of its intensity relative to other stimuli.
JUDGMENT
1. The broadest meaning is everything about which something can be asserted, declared, insisted, assumed, told, implied. That is, everything that can be expressed in the standard form of a sentence in the explanatory mood. There are different types of judgments: 2. Formal judgment - a statement that links objects, events and properties (or their symbolic representations) with each other in a certain way. Such judgments are ultimately neither true nor false; their truth consists in their conformity with the principles of logic. The formal judgment "apples are red" is deductively true or false, depending on previous judgments about apples, color, laws of perception, and so on. 3. An empirical judgment is a statement of this kind, but its elements consist of observable objects, events, or actions (or their symbolic representations), and their truth can be empirically verified. The empirical judgment "apples are red" can be obviously true or false, based on observation of apples and determination of their color. 4. A linguistic proposition is a formal statement that represents a component of the meaning underlying the sentence. Here the sentence "apples are red" can be represented as (apples, all, red). The concept of truth does not apply in this case; here it is of interest whether the judgment gives accurate description the main meaning of the analyzed sentence.
JUDGMENT
a universally valid verbal form, thanks to which an abstract universality is given to the sensual image. S. develops in people as a converted and verbally expressed form of perceptual activity that performs a planning and regulatory role in the overall labor process. S. can be built on the basis of verbal designations of general ideas, which in the initial period of cognition can be observed and ascertained directly in perception, and then take shape in various sign and symbolic systems. A number of private C objects can be replaced by a new word - a name, the content of which will be a collapsed idea of C objects. With the help of general ideas and C. produced on their basis, a person can make rather complex conclusions. S. is a direct product of the object-sensory activity of people. Generalization in S. is based on the principle of formal, abstract identity and is a feature of empirical thinking.
Ticket number 7
Essence of judgment and its structure.
Judgment is a form of thought through which the presence or absence of any connections and relations between objects is revealed.
The hallmark of judgment is the affirmation or denial of something about something. The judgment may be true or false. The truth of a judgment is determined by its correspondence to reality, it does not depend on our attitude towards it and is objective. The truth of judgments about the simplest everyday situations is obvious and does not require special research. In science, it took years of hard work to confirm or deny any proposition. This also applies to legal practice.
Every proposition is expressed in a sentence, but not every proposition is a proposition. A judgment can be a sentence that communicates some information that is characterized as true or false, i.e. it can only be a declarative sentence.
The following elements can be distinguished in the judgment: subject, predicate, connective and quantifier.
The subject of judgment (S) is the concept of the subject of judgment, what we judge; it contains the original knowledge.
Judgment predicate (P) called the concept of the sign of the object, what is said about the subject of the judgment. The predicate contains new knowledge about the subject. The subject and predicate are called terms of judgment.
Bundle expresses the relationship between subject and predicate. The link combines the terms of the judgment into a single whole, establishing whether or not the attribute belongs to the subject. A link can be expressed in one word (is, essence, is) or a group of words, or a dash.
quantifier or quantifier word(“all”, “none”, “some”), characterizes the judgment from the side of its quantity, indicates the relation of the judgment to the entire volume of the concept expressing the subject, or to its part.
There are a number of ways to identify the subject and predicate in a sentence. First, we can specifically single out the subject of the judgment, which is the subject of the sentence. For example, "The place where the lawyer Petrov will speak is the court." In this sentence, the subject is the subject, which is emphasized by the introductory sentence. Secondly, the order of words in a sentence must obey the rule, everything known in the judgment is shifted towards the subject at the beginning of the sentence, and the predicate, as a carrier of novelty, is placed at the end. Thirdly, you can use logical stress. In oral speech, it is expressed by amplifying the voice, and in writing by underlining. Finally, it is very important to consider the context, which comes to the rescue in particularly difficult cases.
Types of judgments.
Simple- a judgment expressing the connection of two concepts or expressed by one concept when the second is implied (for example, “This is a person”; “The rose has a pleasant smell”)
by volume of the subject or by quantity;
Single- judgments containing an affirmation or denial of one subject (for example, "This building is an architectural monument").
General- a judgment in which something is affirmed or denied about all objects of a certain class using the words everyone, no one, anyone, everyone (for example: “All the witnesses testified”, “No one came to the meeting.”)
Private- a judgment in which something is affirmed or denied about a part of objects of a certain class using the words some, many, few, most, minority, part (for example, "Part of the crimes Refers to economic").
by the quality of the bond;
affirmative- judgments expressing belonging to the subject of any property;
negative- judgments expressing the absence of an object of any property;
attributive judgments- judgments about the attribute of the subject. They reflect the connection between the object and its attribute, this connection is affirmed or denied. Attributive judgments are also called categorical, i.e. clear, unconditional. The logical scheme of the attributive judgment S - P, where S is the subject of the judgment, P is the predicate, "-" is the link. For example, "The lawyer met with the accused."
judgments about relationships between objects(the so-called judgments with relations). These can be relations of equality, inequality, spatial, temporal, causal, etc. For example: “A is equal to B”, “Kazan is east of Moscow”, “Semyon is Sergey's father”, etc. (relational judgments)
judgments of existence expressing the very fact of the existence or non-existence of the subject of judgment. For example, "There are statistical laws." The predicates of these judgments are the concepts of the existence or non-existence of an object.
- a form of thought in the form of a statement about the presence or absence of an object of some property, quality. There are such judgments: a) a formal judgment - a statement that connects objects, phenomena, events in a certain way; the truth of such a judgment consists in its compliance with the principles of formal logic (depending on whether or not it contradicts the original judgments); b) empirical judgment - a judgment, the truth of which can be verified empirically. For example, one can be sure that "an apple is red" just by looking at it; c) linguistic judgment - a formal judgment that represents a component of the meaning underlying the sentence. For example, the judgments "apples are red" can be represented as "apples, all of them, are red". There are different connotations (logical predicates) of a judgment, it depends on the form in which they are expressed. In a categorical judgment, the individual speaks as if he had no doubts about its truth. In a hypothetical judgment, only an assumption is made about something. In other judgments, relations of knowledge, faith, doubts, convictions, evaluations, etc. are expressed. (“I think...”, “I do not consider it necessary...”, “I believe...”, etc.). Developed abstract thinking allows the individual to differentiate many of these shades of judgment and prefer the rational aspect of judgment;
- a hypothetical mental faculty whose function is to generate a judgment;
- in psychopathology - a disorder of the ability to judge judgments consists in the fact that judgments are considered true that correspond to some affective, irrational need or are caused by a violation of thinking. In addition, the semantic connotations of the judgment, the changes in its meaning depending on the context in which it is used, are not distinguished;
- the process of forming an opinion or conclusion based on available material, as well as the opinion or opinion formed;
- a critical assessment of some thing, event, person, oneself;
- in psychophysics, a decision regarding the presence or absence of a signal or its intensity in comparison with other stimuli.
- In general, the process of forming an opinion or conclusion based on available material, as well as the prevailing opinion or conclusion.
- A hypothetical mental faculty whose function is to make such a judgment. This meaning is found only in older works.
- In logic, a statement about the relationship between symbols in the form of a sentence.
- A critical appraisal of some thing, event, or person.
- In psychophysics, a decision regarding the presence or absence of a signal, or an assessment of its intensity in relation to other stimuli.
Judgment (English judgment)- a generally valid verbal form (statement), thanks to which an abstract universality is given to sensory experience. The judgment contains the object in the definition of singularity and in the definition of universality. Judgment is formed in people as a converted and verbally expressed form of perceptual activity that performs a planning and regulating role in the overall labor process. S. m. b. It is built on the basis of verbal designations of general ideas, which in the initial period of cognition can be observed and ascertained directly in perception, and then formed in various sign and symbolic systems. A number of private S. about objects can be replaced by a new word-name, the content of which will be a collapsed idea of S. objects. With the help of general ideas and S. produced on their basis, a person can make rather complex conclusions.
Judgment is a direct derivative of the subject-sensory activity of people. generalization in S. is based on the principle of formal, abstract identity and is a feature of empirical thinking. But the cognition of socialized humanity from the very beginning acquired a rational form, therefore, sensory data appear in the process of cognition in the form of S., and an individual, guided by social needs, relatively disinterestedly singles out the objective properties of objects, and also takes into account the opinions and judgments of other people. Cm . Attributive, Knowledge.
Great Encyclopedia of Psychiatry. Zhmurov V.A.
Judgment
Dictionary of psychiatric terms. V.M. Bleikher, I.V. Crook
Judgment- the main form of mental activity. S. formulates a preliminary result of the thought process. Judgment is fundamentally actionable and has a social aspect. Reflecting the relationship of the subject to the object, S. is emotionally saturated.
Judgment is the result of concepts and ideas. Verification of the truth of S. is carried out in the context of its logical verification, criticality. Such work on S. is reasoning. Reasoning, showing the truth of S., becomes its justification, it reveals the legitimacy of S.'s premises and, thus, takes the form of a conclusion. The main types of S.: affirmative and categorical; problematic, reality and necessary.
Dictionary practical psychologist. S.Yu. Golovin
Judgment- one of the logical forms of thinking (=> concept; inference). Reflects the relationship between two concepts - subject and predicate. In logic, classifications of judgments are developed. Psychology studies their development as a form of abstract, logical thinking, as well as violations of logical thinking. In the psychological literature, interpretations of the psychological mechanisms underlying the relationship of concepts are given.
Oxford dictionary in psychology
Judgment
subject area of the term
JUDGMENT
If what is said is evaluated only by the truth value (statements: "A is true" or "A is false"), FROM. called assertoric. If approved (of truth) of what has been said [statement mode: "A - perhaps (true)' or 'it is possible that A (true)"], FROM. called problematic. When is it approved (of truth) of what has been said [statement mode: “But it is necessary (true)" or "it is necessary that A (true)"], FROM. called apodictic. Other assessments of what has been said are, of course, also possible. e.g.“L - excellent” or “L - unsuccessful”, but this kind of S. has not yet found a formal expression in c.-l. logical theories.
In the classic the logic of unity. the method of evaluating what has been said is reduced to the first case considered above, but what has been said and assertoric. said (as Tables 1 and 2 show), With t. sp. this logic,
And true
true lie
true lie
false truth
false truth
indistinguishable. Therefore, in the classical logic terms "S." and "statement" are synonymous and as independent. objects of S.'s research are not allocated. Subject specialist. studying S. actually become only in modal logic.
Siegwart X., Logic, per. With German, t. 1, St. Petersburg, 1908; What's up? Ch A., Introduction to Mathematics. logic per. With English, t. 1, M., I960, § 04; Face R., Modal , per.[from English], M., 1974.
Philosophical encyclopedic dictionary. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. Ch. editors: L. F. Ilyichev, P. N. Fedoseev, S. M. Kovalev, V. G. Panov. 1983 .
JUDGMENT
in logic, a proposition, expressed in the form of a sentence, by which two concepts (and a predicate) are connected; cf. Sentence). In judgment, thought crystallizes. Judgment relates to the subject and, at the same time, to its predicates with the help of the link "is", which is always directed to the absolute state of things being affirmed. For it is characteristic of a true judgment that nothing can be allowed that contradicts this judgment and at the same time has validity. If a given state of affairs exists, then by judgment these conditions are juxtaposed as categorically as the state of affairs itself. The internal, inalienable quality of any judgment is that it contains with its content all possible subjects of knowledge, all possible states of things and necessary conditions. This set of all possible subjects, states of affairs and necessary conditions is governed by one general law - the law of non-contradiction. Kant in the Critique of Pure Reason distinguishes the following types of judgments: 1) by quantity - general, particular and singular; 2) by quality - affirmative, negative, infinite; 3) in relation - categorical, hypothetical, dividing; 4) by modality - problematic, assertoric, apodictic. Analytical, or explanatory, judgments are, according to Kant, judgments, the predicate of which is already contained in advance in the subject (“all bodies are extended”); synthetic, or expanding, judgments - judgments that add to the concept of the subject a predicate that is not yet implied in the knowledge of the subject ("all bodies have weight").
Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary. 2010 .
JUDGMENT
In traditional In formal logic (up to Frege's work on logical semantics), S. was understood (with various minor reservations and additions) as an affirmative or negative declarative sentence. However, in the traditional the doctrine of S., especially in the section on the transformation of the form of judgment, was intuitively implied in the use of the terms "S." and "declarative sentence". The former was commonly used as a term for the assertions (or denials) of "something about something" carried out by means of declarative sentences (in one language or another). The second one served for the linguistic characterization of statements, i.e. remained predominantly a grammatical term. This implicit difference found expression in the distinction (in the general case) between the logical structure of S. and the grammatical structure of sentences, which had been carried out since the time of Aristotelian syllogistics. Yes, in the classic attributive S. with the subject (what is said, or is said - speech) was identified, as with grammatical. subject, and the predicate (what is said, or is said, about the subject of speech - the subject) was already understood grammatically. predicate and was identified with the nominal part of the predicate, expressed, for example, by an adjective. Unlike grammatical, logical saying (form S.) has always meant that the subject (subject S.) has (or does not have) a definition. , i.e. was reduced to an attributive three-term connection: subject - verb-link - .
The indicated difference in the use of the terms "S." and "declarative sentence" led later to a clearer definition of the concepts corresponding to them. Already for B. Bolzano, and then for G. Frege, S. is the (meaning) of a true (or false) declarative sentence. Characteristics of a (narrative) sentence with t. sp. its truth value goes back to Aristotle and is certainly not new. The main thing that distinguishes understanding from the traditional one is the abstraction of the content of the (narrative) sentence - S. in the proper sense of the word - from its truth value and from the material (linguistic) form of its expression, the allocation of S. exclusively as a logical element of speech - an abstract object " ... of the same degree of generality as , number or " (Church A., Introduction to mathematical logic, M., 1960, p. 32). Essentially new is also the selection of the truth values of sentences - "truth" and "falsehood" (which can be assigned to each declarative sentence as its value) - as independent abstract objects included in the interpretation of logical calculi. This new t. sp. explained equivalent transformations in logic based on the principle of volume (see Volume, Principle of abstraction): all true sentences are equivalent in the interval of abstraction of identification in meaning (but not in meaning). On the other hand, it allowed to generalize the traditions. the concept of structure S. on the basis of the concept of a logical (or propositional) function, the values of which are sentences, or their truth values. Thus, the sentence "Socrates is a man" in the tradition. understanding corresponded to "S is R". If in this scheme S and P are understood as variables having different ranges of values, or as variables of different semantic levels, or of different sorts, or, finally, belonging to different alphabets: – as a variable on the domain of "individual names", and P as variable on the field of "concepts", then when choosing the concept "person" as the value of the variable Ρ (or in the general case, assuming that the variable Ρ is fixed, i.e., assuming that Ρ has a well-defined, albeit arbitrary, unspecified in the given context , meaning) the scheme "S is P" is transformed into the expression "S is a person" (in the general case, into the expression "... is P", where dots replace the letter S), which, when substituting an individual name (value ) "Socrates" turns into a true sentence. Obviously, the expression ". ..there is a person" (in the general case, the expression "...there is P") is a function of one variable, which takes the values " " or "false" when a certain subject is put in place of the dots, playing here the usual the role of the function argument.Similarly, the expression "...greater than..." is a function of two variables, and the expression "is between... and..." is a function of three variables, etc. So. , the modern view of the structure of S. is reduced to the fact that its traditional "predicate" and "subject" are replaced by the exact mathematical concepts of the function and its arguments, respectively. would cover not only (and even not so much) syllogistic, but also in particular - the main conclusions of science.In turn, the functional form of expression S. opens up wide opportunities for formalizing the proposals of any scientific theory.(Explanation of how in modern logic characterizes and formalizes the subject-predicate S. see in Article Quantor and Pr. edicate calculus.)
M. Novoselov. Moscow.
The above divisions of S. into species were created by Ch. way to serve the needs of the traditional. formal logic and, above all, for solving problems of the main. its section - the theory of inference. So, the division of S. according to quantity, quality and modality was established by Aristotle for the needs of the theory of syllogistic created by him. conclusion (see Syllogistic). The division of S. into simple and complex ones and the development of the question of the types of complex S. by the logicians of the megarostoic school were required for their study of various types of conditional and disjunctive inferences. The division of S. into S. properties and S. relations arose in connection with the consideration of etc. non-syllogistic reasoning. It is usually believed that the task of formal logic does not include all the types and varieties of S. found in cognition and the construction of an all-encompassing classification of S. Attempts to construct this kind of classifications took place in the history of philosophy [such, for example, S. by Wundt (see W. Wundt, Logik, 4 Aufl., Bd 1, Stuttg., 1920)].
However, it should be noted that, in addition to the formal approach to the question of the types of S., when S. are divided into types according to exactly fixed. logical the foundations of division and the division itself is established to serve the needs of the theory of inference, another, epistemological, is also quite legitimate. approach to this issue. For a correctly understood epistemological approach to the problem of the types of S. characteristic is the comparative cognitive value of the types of S. known in science and the study of transitions from one type of S. to another in the process of cognition of reality. So, considering from this t. sp. division of S. by quantity, we pay attention to the fact that single S. play basically a dual role in the process of cognition. First, individual S. express and consolidate knowledge about the otd. items. These include historical events, characteristics personalities, description of the Earth, the Sun, etc. At the same time, among this kind of single S., we note the transition from the so-called. S. belongings, in which only the belonging of a feature to an object is affirmed, to including and highlighting S., as soon as we establish that the asserted feature belongs not only to this subject (including judgment) or only to this subject (selecting judgment). Secondly, individual S. prepare the afterbirth, the formulation of private and general S. Having studied all the layers of k.-l. geological section and fixing in a number of single S. that each of the studied layers is of marine origin, we can express the general S: "All layers of a given geological section are of marine origin."
Concerning the particular S., we note that in the process of cognition of reality, a transition is made from the indeterminate. private S. to the definition. private S. or to general S. Indeed, indefinite. private S. (or simply private S.) is expressed in such cases when, knowing that certain objects of c.-l. class of objects have or do not have a certain feature, we have not yet established either that all other objects of a given class of objects also have (do not have) this feature, or that certain others do not (have) this feature. objects of this class of objects. If it is further established that the Dec. only some or all objects of a given class have a sign, then the particular S. is replaced by a definite. private or general S. So, private S. "Some metals are heavier than water" in the process of studying metals is specified in the definition. private S. "Only certain metals are heavier than water." Particular C. "Some types of mechanical motions pass through friction into heat" is replaced by general C. "Any mechanical movement passes through friction into heat." Def. particular S., solving the problem put forward by private S., namely, whether all or not all objects of a given class of objects have or do not have a certain characteristic, at the same time leaves unresolved the question of which objects have or do not have a valid attribute. To eliminate this uncertainty, private S. must be replaced by either a general or a plural highlighting S. To move from a specific. private S. to the so-called. multiple allocating S. is required to establish qualities. the certainty of each of those certain objects, which are discussed in the definition. private C. In this case, for example, def. the quotient S. "Only some pupils of this class do well in Russian" is replaced by the plural emphasizing S. "Of all the pupils in this class, only Shatov, Petrov, and Ivanov do well in Russian." The transition to the general distinguishing S. is carried out when we can single out one or more of the known common features of certain objects of a given kind as a characteristic feature of all these ("some") objects. For example, having learned that all those ("certain") animals referred to in C. "Only certain animals have large intestines" constitute a class of mammals, we can express a general distinguishing C: " All mammals, and only mammals, have large intestines." Transitions of this kind between S. can also be established with the so-called. sp. their modalities and in some other respects (see A. P. Sheptulin, Dialectical, M., 1965, pp. 271–80; Logic, edited by D. P. Gorsky and P. V. Tavanets, M. , 1956).
Lit.: Tavanets P.V., Vopr. theory of judgments., 1955: P. S. Popov, Judgment, M., 1957; Akhmanov A. S., The logical doctrine of Aristotle, M., 1900; Smirnova E. D., On the problem of analytic and synthetic, in: Philos. question modern formal logic, Moscow, 1962; Gorsky D.P., Logic, 2nd ed., M., 1963.
P. Tavanets. Moscow.
Philosophical Encyclopedia. In 5 volumes - M .: Soviet Encyclopedia. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. 1960-1970 .
JUDGMENT
JUDGEΕΗИΕ - a thought that affirms the presence or absence of any state of affairs. Distinguish between simple and complex sentences. A proposition is called simple if it is impossible to single out the correct part, that is, the part that does not coincide with the whole, which in turn is a proposition. The main types of simple judgments are attributive and relationship judgments. Judgments are called attributive, in which the belonging to objects of properties or the absence of objects of any properties is expressed. Attributive judgments can be interpreted as judgments about the full or partial inclusion or non-inclusion of one set of objects in another, or as judgments about whether an object belongs or does not belong to a class of objects. Attributive judgments consist of a subject (logical subject), a predicate (logical predicate) and a connective, and in some there are also so-called quantifier (quantitative) words (“some”, “all”, “none”, etc.). The subject and the predicate are called terms of judgment.
The subject is often denoted by the Latin letter S (from the word “subjectum”), and the predicate - P (from the word “praedicatum”). In the judgment “Some sciences are not humanities”, the subject () is “sciences”, the predicate () is “humanities”, the connective is “are not”, and “some” is quantifier. Attributive judgments are divided into types "by quality" and "by quantity". By quality, they are affirmative (the link “essence” or “is”) and negative (the link “is not the essence” or “is not”). By quantity, attributive judgments are divided into single, general and particular. In singular judgments, the belonging or non-belonging of an object to a class of objects is expressed. In general - or non-inclusion of a class of objects in a class.
In particular judgments, the partial inclusion or non-inclusion of a class of objects in a class of objects is expressed. In them the word "some" is used in the sense of "at least some, and maybe all."
Judgments of the form “All S are Ps> (general affirmative), “No S is su P” (general negative), “Some S are P” (particular affirmative), “Some S are not P” (particular negative) are called categorical. Terms in categorical judgments can be distributed (taken in full) and not distributed (taken not in full). Subjects are distributed in general judgments, and predicates in negative ones. The remaining terms are not assigned.
Judgments that say that a certain relation takes place (or does not take place) between the elements of pairs, triplets, etc. of objects are called judgments about relations. They are divided by quality into affirmative and negative. According to the number of judgments about two-place relations, they are divided into single-single, general-general, private-private, singular-general, single-private, common-singular, private-single, general-private, private-general. For example, the proposition “Each student of our group knows some academician” is a general-private one. Similarly, the division into types according to the number of judgments about tripartite, quadruple, etc. relations. Thus, the proposition “Some students of the Faculty of Philosophy know some ancient languages better than any modern foreign language” is private-private-general.
In addition to attributive and relationship judgments, existence judgments (of the type “Aliens exist”) and judgments of identity (equality) (of the “a=fe>” type) are distinguished as special types of simple judgments.
The described judgments, as well as complex judgments formed from them, are called assertoric. They are (simply) affirmations or negations. Along with affirmations and denials, so-called strong and weak affirmations and denials are singled out. For example, strengthening the assertoric judgments “Communication with their own kind is inherent in a person”, “A person does not live forever”, “A person has soft earlobes” are, respectively, the judgments “A person necessarily has the property of communication with his own kind”, “A person cannot live forever ”, “A person accidentally has soft earlobes.” Strong and weak affirmations and negations are alethic modal judgments. Among them are judgments of necessity (apodictic), possibility and chance.
There are several types of complex judgments. Connective propositions are propositions that assert the existence of two or more situations. In natural language, they are formed from other judgments most often through the union “and”. This union is denoted by the symbol l, which is called the sign of the (commutative) conjunction. A judgment with this conjunction is called (commutatively) conjunctive. The definition of the conjunction sign is a table showing the dependence of the value of a conjunctive judgment on the values of its constituent judgments. In it, “and” and “l” are abbreviations for the values “true” and “false”.
Judgments that assert the sequential occurrence or existence of two or more situations are called non-commutative-conjunctive. They are formed from two or more judgments with the help of conjunctions denoted characters T-t, 7h, etc., depending on the number of judgments from which they are formed. These symbols are called non-commutative conjunction signs and are respectively read “..., and then...”, *..., then..., and then...”, etc. Indices 2,3, etc. . indicate the locality of the union.
Separating judgments are judgments in which the presence of one of two, three, etc. situations is affirmed. If the existence of at least one of the two situations is asserted, the judgment is called (loosely) disjunctive, or disjunctive. If the existence of exactly one of two or more situations is asserted, the judgment is called strictly disjunctive, or strictly disjunctive. The union “or”, by means of which the statement of the first type is expressed, is denoted by the symbol ν (read “or”), called the sign of non-strict disjunction (or simply the sign of disjunction), and the union “or ..., or ...”, by means of which statement of the second type, - by the symbol y (it is read “either ..., or ...”), called the sign of strict disjunction. Tabular definitions of signs of non-strict and strict disjunction:
A judgment in which it is stated that the presence of one situation determines the presence of is called conditional. Conditional propositions are most often expressed in sentences with the union “if ..., then ...”. The conditional union “if..., then...” is indicated by the arrow “->”.
In the languages of modern logic, the union “if ..., then ...”, denoted by the symbol “e”, is widely used. This is called the sign of the (material) implication, and the judgment with this union is called the implicative. The part of the implicative proposition that is between the words "if" and "then" is called the antecedent, and the part that is after the word "then" is called the consequent. The sign of the implication is determined by the truth table:
An equivalence judgment is a judgment that asserts the mutual conditionality of two situations. The conjunction "if and only if...then..." is used in yet another sense. In this case, it is denoted by the symbol “=”, called the sign of material equivalence, which is determined by the truth table:
Judgments with this union are called judgments of material equivalence.
The simple illogical modal judgments have been characterized above. Compound judgments formed from other judgments by means of the expressions “it is necessary that”, “accidentally that”, it is possible that” are also called alethic modal judgments. Alethic modal judgments are also complex judgments, the individual components of which are alethic modal judgments. Alethic modal concepts (“necessary”, “accidentally”, “possibly”) are divided into logical and actual (physical). A state of affairs may be logically possible or factually possible, logically necessary or actually necessary, logically accidental or actually accidental. What is logically possible is that which does not contradict the laws of logic. In fact, that is possible that does not contradict the laws of nature and social life.
