本文選題：20世紀(jì) + 中國(guó)��； 參考：《華東師范大學(xué)》2002年博士論文

【摘要】： 邏輯學(xué)在與哲學(xué)分離之前(必須對(duì)這種分離的有限性給予充分的注意)，為哲學(xué)家所用，是哲學(xué)家研究哲學(xué)問(wèn)題的有力工具：在與哲學(xué)有所分離之后，邏輯學(xué)差不多成為所有學(xué)科的工具，但依然為哲學(xué)家所用；現(xiàn)代邏輯甚至成為研究某些哲學(xué)問(wèn)題不可或缺的工具，它的某些方法的哲學(xué)方法論性質(zhì)越來(lái)越明顯。20世紀(jì)初，隨著西方邏輯學(xué)的系統(tǒng)輸入，中國(guó)哲學(xué)中傳統(tǒng)的名實(shí)之辯演變?yōu)榻倪壿嬚摖?zhēng)。本文將通過(guò)對(duì)中西邏輯學(xué)、歸納與演繹、形式邏輯與辯證邏輯、傳統(tǒng)邏輯與現(xiàn)代邏輯等相關(guān)爭(zhēng)論的研究，考察20世紀(jì)邏輯觀在中國(guó)的演變過(guò)程。 世紀(jì)初的某些中國(guó)學(xué)者有自相矛盾之處：一方面以“名學(xué)”、“辯學(xué)”、“論理學(xué)”譯logic，這意味著他們認(rèn)為可以有不同的表述邏輯的系統(tǒng)即邏輯是多元的，中國(guó)關(guān)于邏輯的理論與西方的邏輯學(xué)是平等的；另一方面又往往以簡(jiǎn)單比附的方法研究中國(guó)古代關(guān)于邏輯的理論，這意味著他們持有西方邏輯學(xué)的一元邏輯觀。比附法在中國(guó)古代邏輯史領(lǐng)域曾有過(guò)巨大的歷史貢獻(xiàn)，但一味地堅(jiān)持這種研究方法，或只注意到它的優(yōu)點(diǎn)而忽視它的缺點(diǎn)，則無(wú)疑是把西方的邏輯學(xué)視為唯一的邏輯學(xué)，這是一元邏輯觀；即以西方的邏輯學(xué)為參照物，又把西方的邏輯學(xué)視為一個(gè)平等的他者，也就是在研究中即注意中西邏輯學(xué)之相同的一面，又注意中西邏輯學(xué)之不同的一面，這是一種多元邏輯觀。 嚴(yán)復(fù)與金岳霖的一元邏輯觀雖有演繹與歸納的區(qū)別，但從反對(duì)中國(guó)舊學(xué)的治學(xué)方法這一角度看，二者又有一致之處；對(duì)中國(guó)傳統(tǒng)哲學(xué)概念的改造，嚴(yán)復(fù)和金岳霖所走的路全然不同。無(wú)論是從信念的角度，還是從類比推理或時(shí)態(tài)邏輯的角度，張岱年都沒(méi)能給歸納合理性以必然性的辯護(hù)，所以他反復(fù)強(qiáng)調(diào)歸納的基礎(chǔ)在于實(shí)踐。金岳霖試圖給歸納以演繹主義的辯護(hù)，讓體現(xiàn)實(shí)證精神的歸納也能夠具有演繹的特點(diǎn)。陳波先生認(rèn)為金岳霖的論證是機(jī)智的、是與西方哲學(xué)的平等對(duì)話，但其論證是無(wú)效的，他主張歸納問(wèn)題在邏輯上無(wú)解。 從20世紀(jì)30年代到世紀(jì)末，中國(guó)學(xué)者對(duì)辯證邏輯的看法走過(guò)了這樣一個(gè)歷程：30—40年代，有“辯證法可否成為邏輯”的爭(zhēng)論；50—60年代，幾乎沒(méi)有學(xué)者公開(kāi)對(duì)辯證邏輯作為邏輯的合法地位提出質(zhì)疑；80年代之后，又起辯證邏輯是不是邏輯之爭(zhēng)，但反對(duì)者的觀點(diǎn)已變?yōu)椤稗q證邏輯不是邏輯”。80年代以后，中國(guó)學(xué)者對(duì)辯證法與辯證邏輯的區(qū)分已非常自覺(jué)。 傳統(tǒng)邏輯與現(xiàn)代邏輯的爭(zhēng)論，主要表現(xiàn)在如何改革大學(xué)文科邏輯教材上，也表現(xiàn)在以哪種邏輯作為研究中國(guó)古代關(guān)于邏輯的理論發(fā)展史的工具更合適的問(wèn)題上。在傳統(tǒng)與現(xiàn)代之爭(zhēng)中，不再有人對(duì)傳統(tǒng)邏輯持諸如“傳統(tǒng)邏輯不是邏輯”的觀點(diǎn)，對(duì)傳統(tǒng)邏輯加以批評(píng)的學(xué)者都是從其不科學(xué)、不嚴(yán)密、包含有非邏輯的內(nèi)容等方面入手。古代關(guān)于邏輯的思想看作一個(gè)尚未確定的領(lǐng)域，從而也就不能不注意到對(duì)象與工具相統(tǒng)一的方面，在對(duì)象的內(nèi)容范圍尚不確定的情況下，我們研究的工具完全可以是多元化的，既要用傳統(tǒng)邏輯的工具，也要用現(xiàn)代邏輯的各分支所提供的工具去研究，最低限度這種研究可以是嘗試性的，但嘗試性研究是科學(xué)研究的必經(jīng)階段。伴隨著傳統(tǒng)與現(xiàn)代之爭(zhēng)，出現(xiàn)了“大邏輯”、“小邏輯”之說(shuō)。所謂大邏輯、小邏輯實(shí)際上是邏輯觀的分野，兩種觀點(diǎn)對(duì)邏輯學(xué)作不同的理解。大邏輯觀對(duì)邏輯作廣義的理解，在這種解讀下，傳統(tǒng)邏輯與現(xiàn)代邏輯、形式邏輯與辯證邏輯、演繹邏輯與歸納邏輯都是邏輯；小邏輯觀對(duì)邏輯作較狹義的理解，只有演繹邏輯、形式邏輯、現(xiàn)代邏輯才是真正意義上的邏輯學(xué)，傳統(tǒng)邏輯中的很多內(nèi)容、辯證邏輯、培根所倡導(dǎo)的那種既可作歸納邏輯理解又可作歸納方法理解的歸納邏輯均被排除在邏輯學(xué)之外。雖然小邏輯觀稱大邏輯觀不夠科學(xué)，大邏輯觀斥小邏輯觀狹隘、不夠?qū)捜�，但兩種觀點(diǎn)也有相通之處：小邏輯觀所承認(rèn)是邏輯學(xué)的內(nèi)容，大邏輯觀無(wú)不承認(rèn)，，只是大邏輯觀又在此基礎(chǔ)上容納了被小邏輯觀所排斥的東西。小邏輯觀所堅(jiān)持的是形式化標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。 20世紀(jì)的中國(guó)邏輯史，邏輯觀逐步豐富，并走過(guò)了從一元到多元再到一元多元并存的發(fā)展歷程。
[Abstract]:Logic is a powerful tool for philosophers to study philosophical problems before the separation of philosophy from philosophy, which is used by philosophers. After the separation from philosophy, logic is almost a tool for all disciplines, but is still used by philosophers; modern logic even becomes a study. The philosophical methodology of some philosophies is an indispensable tool, and the philosophical methodology of some of its methods is becoming more and more obvious in the early.20 century. With the system input of western logic, the traditional argument in Chinese philosophy evolves into a modern logic argument. This article will be based on the logic of Chinese and western logic, the form logic and dialectical logic, and the traditional logic. Compilation and modern logic study on the evolution of logic view in China in twentieth Century.
Some Chinese scholars at the beginning of the century have their own paradoxes: on the one hand, the logic is translated by "naming", "argument" and "theory of science", which means that they think that the system that can have different logic is pluralistic, the theory of logic is equal to the logic of the west, and on the other hand it is often simple. The attached method studies the theory of logic in ancient China, which means that they hold a single logic view of western logic. The append method has had a great historical contribution in the field of ancient Chinese logic history, but it is no doubt that it is the logic of western logic to insist on this research method, or only pay attention to its advantages and ignore its shortcomings. It is regarded as the only logic, which is a meta logic view, that is, the western logic is regarded as the reference, and the western logic is regarded as an equal other, that is, to pay attention to the same side of the Chinese and western logic in the study, and to pay attention to the different aspects of the Chinese and western logic, which is a multi logic view.
Although the one yuan logic view of Yan Fu and Jin Yuelin has the difference between deductive and inductive, the two ones have the same point of view from the angle of opposing the study method of Chinese old school, and the way for the transformation of the concept of Chinese traditional philosophy is that the road of Yan Fu and Jin Yuelin is completely different, whether from the angle of belief, or from the angle of analogical reasoning or temporal logic. Zhang Dainian failed to defend the reasonableness of inductive reasonableness, so he repeatedly stressed that the basis of induction was practice. Jin Yuelin tried to justify induction by deductivism, so that the induction of positivist spirit could also have deductive characteristics. Mr. Chen Bo thought Jin Yuelin's argument was witty and equal to western philosophy. Dialogue, but its argument is invalid. He maintains that inductive questions are logically unsolved.
From 1930s to the end of the century, Chinese scholars have gone through such a process of dialectical logic: 30 - 40s, there is a debate on whether "Dialectics can be a logic"; from 50 to 60s, almost no scholar publicly questioned the legal status of dialectical logic as logic; after 80s, dialectical logic was not. Since the argument of the opposition has changed into "dialectical logic is not logic".80's, Chinese scholars have been very conscious of the distinction between dialectics and dialectical logic.
The debate between the traditional logic and the modern logic is mainly manifested in how to reform the logical teaching materials of the liberal arts of the University, which is also shown in which logic is more appropriate to study the history of the theory of logic in ancient China. In the dispute between traditional and modern, no longer have people to hold traditional logic, such as "traditional logic is not logic". The point of view, the scholars who criticize the traditional logic are from its unscientific, imprecise, and unlogical content. Ancient logic thought was regarded as an undetermined field, so that the object and the tool could not be unnoticed, and the scope of the object's content was still uncertain. The tools we study can be completely pluralistic, not only using the tools of traditional logic, but also the tools provided by the branches of modern logic. At the minimum, this kind of research can be an attempt, but the experimental study is a necessary stage of scientific research. The so-called big logic, the small logic, in fact, is the separation of the logic view, and the two views make different understandings of logic. The great logic is understood in the broad sense of logic. Under this interpretation, the traditional logic and modern logic, the formal logic and the dialectical logic, the deductive logic and the inductive logic are all logic; the small logic is narrower to the logic. Only deductive logic, formal logic, and modern logic are logic in the real sense, many contents and dialectical logic in traditional logic. The inductive logic that Bacon advocates, which can be understood by inductive logic and can be understood by inductive method, is excluded from logic. Although the view of small logic is called the big logic view is not enough. Science, the view of big logic denounced the narrow and intolerant view of small logic, but it was not tolerant, but the two views also had the same points: the view of small logic was the content of logic, the view of great logic admits, but on the basis of the view of logic, the view of the small logic adheres to the formalization standard.
The logic history of Chinese logic in twentieth Century is gradually enriched, and has gone through the course of development from one yuan to multiple to one yuan.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2002
【分類號(hào)】：B81-092

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 王欣;金岳霖演繹邏輯思想探析[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2011年

2 于永軍;馬克思邏輯與歷史統(tǒng)一的理論[D];山東師范大學(xué);2010年

本文編號(hào)：1959117