再论充足理由律是否为逻辑基本规律——兼论“广义同一律”是最基本的逻辑规律
|
摘要
充足理由律由17世纪的德国哲学家莱布尼茨提出。此后的很长一段时期里,对于充足理由律是否为逻辑基本规律的问题,学术界一直存在争议,至今在各种版本的逻辑教材中也存在不同的观点。目前,大多数学术观点认为同一律、矛盾律、排中律为传统逻辑三大基本规律,但其中哪一种规律是传统规律中最基本的规律问题还存在争议,至今未得到解决。"广义同一律"的提出,试图对"充足理由律是否为逻辑基本规律"及"谁是传统逻辑中最基本的逻辑规律"两大问题做出回答。
The law of sufficient reason was put forward by the German philosopher Leibniz in seventeenth century.In a long period of time,there has been controversy in the academic circle of whether the law of sufficient reason is the basic logic of logic,and there are different views in the logical textbooks of various versions.At present,most of the academic views believe that the three basic laws of the same law,the law of contradiction and the law of exclusion are the traditional logic,but which of them is the most basic law problem in the traditional law is still controversial and has not been solved so far.The generalized same law is put forward to try to answer two questions about whether the law of sufficient reason is the basic logic of logic and who is the most basic logic law in traditional logic.
The law of sufficient reason was put forward by the German philosopher Leibniz in seventeenth century.In a long period of time,there has been controversy in the academic circle of whether the law of sufficient reason is the basic logic of logic,and there are different views in the logical textbooks of various versions.At present,most of the academic views believe that the three basic laws of the same law,the law of contradiction and the law of exclusion are the traditional logic,but which of them is the most basic law problem in the traditional law is still controversial and has not been solved so far.The generalized same law is put forward to try to answer two questions about whether the law of sufficient reason is the basic logic of logic and who is the most basic logic law in traditional logic.
引文
[1](英)戴维·鲁宾森,朱迪·葛洛夫.视读柏拉图[M].合肥:安徽文艺出版社,2009:44.
[2]亚里士多德.后分析篇[M].北京:北京师范大学政教系逻辑教室,1979.
[3]陈艳波.康德对莱布尼茨充足理由律的理解和改造[J].东岳论丛,2015(9):44-48.
[4](美)加勒特·汤姆森(Garrett Thomson).莱布尼茨[M].李素霞,杨富斌,译.北京:中华书局,2002.
[5]高媛媛.对充足理由律的思考[J].河南广播电视大学学报,2013(2):17-18.
[6]刘培育.评关于充足理由律的六种说法[J].南开学报(哲学社会科学版),1980(2):75-80.
[7]《普通逻辑》编写组.普通逻辑[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1982.
[8]华东师范大学哲学系逻辑学教研室.形式逻辑(第四版)[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009.
[9]王自贵.莱布尼茨逻辑思想研究[D].重庆:西南大学,2013.
[10]金岳霖.形式逻辑[M].北京:人民出版社,1986.
[11]黄卫星.漫步在“语言逻辑叙事”的丛林之间[M].上海:学林出版社,2016.
[2]亚里士多德.后分析篇[M].北京:北京师范大学政教系逻辑教室,1979.
[3]陈艳波.康德对莱布尼茨充足理由律的理解和改造[J].东岳论丛,2015(9):44-48.
[4](美)加勒特·汤姆森(Garrett Thomson).莱布尼茨[M].李素霞,杨富斌,译.北京:中华书局,2002.
[5]高媛媛.对充足理由律的思考[J].河南广播电视大学学报,2013(2):17-18.
[6]刘培育.评关于充足理由律的六种说法[J].南开学报(哲学社会科学版),1980(2):75-80.
[7]《普通逻辑》编写组.普通逻辑[M].上海:上海人民出版社,1982.
[8]华东师范大学哲学系逻辑学教研室.形式逻辑(第四版)[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2009.
[9]王自贵.莱布尼茨逻辑思想研究[D].重庆:西南大学,2013.
[10]金岳霖.形式逻辑[M].北京:人民出版社,1986.
[11]黄卫星.漫步在“语言逻辑叙事”的丛林之间[M].上海:学林出版社,2016.