Successful in its propaedeutical role, logic has remained an inherent part of university education for hundreds of years. Today, however, it is less and less common in academic programs. In its place, courses on Academic Writing, Theory of Argumentation, Decision Making and Critical Thinking are often implemented into the curriculum. Sometimes the place once occupied by logic remains vacant. In the cycle of small articles titled “Logic at University: Between Maths, Argumentation and Cognitive Sciences” which open the first issue of “Philosophy. Journal of the Higher School of Economics” in 2024, their authors reflect on the situation that logic and logics education have come to be in as well as various ways of changing it.
Alexei Krouglov invites us back into the 18th century, to the time of the founding of universities in Russia. He compares the meaning logic had in those times to that of today. This contrast raises a number of questions: is logic (in its wider connotation) able to continue its propaedeutical role, how could introductory logics courses for non-professionals be beneficial, and how should logic education, enhanced by modern mathematical methods, be constructed in philosophical faculties, so that it does not “put students off from a deeper investigation of the subject”.
Elena Dragalina-Chernaya and Angelina Bobrova seek answers to some of the above questions in their articles. E.G. Dragalina-Chernaya views logic as a formal philosophy, which has lost the function of neutral arbitrator in the argument, but retained its role as conceptual designer in theoretical research. The diversity of non-classical logics has led modern logic to pluralism, and, as a result, to the rejection of attempts to construct a single true and universal theory of correct reasoning. However, staying true to the ideal of formality, the logical art of conceptual engineering remains, in the view of the author, irreplaceable in an objective scientific investigation, which aims to avoid the extremities of dogmatism and relativism. A.S. Bobrova focuses on short interfaculty courses and takes the reader back to the status of practical logic, developed in the 17-18th centuries and almost nonexistent today. The author displays the advantages of practical logics, dissecting them through the prism of diversity of critical thinking courses. In the Russian educational system, those that stand out contain elements of practical logic, with its clear tasks and time-tested methods. Perhaps this implies that the tradition of teaching practical logic, once so common in the universities of Imperial Russia, has not fully lost its positions.
Through referring to personal experience in teaching different disciplines of the logico-methodological cycle, Galina Sorina and Elena Lisanyuk show the effectiveness of applying logic skill and understanding to solving tasks related to text analysis, collaborations within expert communities, elimination of interpretational and axiological lacunae, that could lead to complications in scientific and pedagogical practices, as well as in legislation and law enforcement. Drawing upon her author’s method of expert text analysis, G.V. Sorina asserts the importance of logics technologies, especially in working with terminology, for evaluating any text regardless of its professional sphere. E.N. Lisanyuk demonstrates the value of the study of logic through the elimination of a legal collision in the “Women and the Jury” case.
The cycle concludes in Valentin Bazhanov’s article, in which evidence is provided for the author’s hypothesis on the mutual dependence between logic and logic education on one hand, and ideological impact on society, not necessarily pro-government, on the other. The researcher uses cognitive science data to back up his ideas and poses the question: could the expansion of logics education help people overcome narrow-mindedness and conservatism by making them more open to seeking new and more rational solutions?
We invite our readers to also reflect upon this question. Our hope is that these articles on teaching logics, an unusual subject known to many, yet still brimming with theoretical and pedagogical problems and even paradoxes, may elicit an eager response in the readers of our journal: one might discover new facts, find food for thought or even be inspired into public discussions.
E.G. Dragalina-Chernaya, A.S. Bobrova
* * *
The current issue further comprises articles unrelated to logic and devoted to other areas of philosophical (or humanitarian) knowledge. The first of these is a piece by Oxana Koval and Ekaterina Kriukova, in which the phenomenon of poetical thinking in Walter Benjamin’s philosophy, as well as in that of his heir in the matter, Hannah Arendt, is addressed. In the history of the former’s posthumous fame, Hannah Arendt has played the role of a medium of sorts – owing not only to the fact that she took it upon herself to publish his works and promote his ideas among the American public, but also because in her own writing she often turned to and developed in her own way the philosophical narratives that had worried him. Igor’ Devaykin’s article is devoted to the problems of factiality ontology by Quentin Meillassoux. The latter is known as one of the foremost fighters against correlationism in modern philosophy. Correlationism is understood by Meillassoux as the amalgamation of post-Kantian conceptions of philosophy, which reject the possibility of discovering the reality independent from thought and suggest focusing on the connection (the correlation) between thought and reality. The author proposes agreeing with Meillassoux in that the above method of philosophizing should be fought, since it is not reflective enough of its own presuppositions and greatly narrows down the field of scientific work. Correlationism of this kind can only be overcome by pointing out factiality, understood as the absolute absence of proof of any kind, including correlationism itself.
In the article by Samson Liberman and Adelya Khayaleeva, the problem of translation as the main language of the modern world is brought to the forefront. Drawing on the work of D. Bachmann-Medik, who formulated the conception of the “translation turn”, the authors suggest reflecting on the move from the paradigm of globalization to that of glocalization. The distinctive feature of “glocal capital” is seen by the authors as the emergence of platforms and relevant systems of production and consumption. The main outcome of the article is the formulation of the contradiction between the emancipatory potential of translation practices and the totalizing implementation of this principle in modern capitalism. The researchers make an analogy to M. Foucault’s discourse concept: if, according to the latter, an intellectual’s mission used to lie in discovering the domination of language, then today it may well reside in uncovering the ascendancy of translation. Alexander Marey’s article, devoted to the analysis of the image of an ideal ruler through the mirror of “History of Spain” by Alfonso X The Wise is, in its own way, a continuation of the previous research, and proposes to reflect upon an interesting case of translation as a tool which constructs ethical political reality. The fact that the investigation deals with material from the medieval period allows to peruse the incident without emotional involvement.
The “Studies” segment is concluded by articles from Harlampy Emeretli and Oleg Domanov. In the former the author turns to the problem of comprehending the definition of suicide. He suggests conceptualizing the phenomenon in the context of polemics with the modern analytical philosophy of suicide, which mainly focuses on clarifying the theoretical grounds of the phenomenon. In particular, unobvious terminology such as intention, coercion, instrumentality and death are subjected to analysis. The article defies the impossibility of constructing an unambiguous definition of suicide strictly separated from other types of death, and the characterization of the phenomenon is of a descriptive character, devoid of judgement in terms of morality or immorality of the act, its rationality or justifiability. Oleg Domanov turns to problems of features and types in type-theoretical natural language semantics. Features and types make up two possible ways of classifying phenomena related to the formalization of grammar and the natural language semantics. Features are commonly used in linguistics-oriented theories, however they do not align well with theory-type semantics due to the notion of subtype to which they lead. The article suggests a way of reconciling the two approaches through defining types via feature-based classification. The author demonstrates this method through formalizing a small fragment of English text. A general formal theory of syntax and semantics for this language is developed and is of separate interest. Formalization is carried out in the Agda language.
In the “Translations and Critical Editions” section we present the Russian translation of the response of the Anglican priest Jonas Proast to the English edition of John Locke’s “Letter on Toleration”, carried out by Aleksander Mel’nikov, together with his introductory investigation. Proast’s texts have not previously been translated to Russian, despite their impact both on Locke’s later political texts and on the modern interpretation of Lockean justification of toleration being widely recognized and discussed in many secondary sources.
The issue concludes in the traditional block of philosophical criticism, which currently comprises Maiia-Sofiia Zhumatina’s review of the book on temporality, chronology and anachrony in modern art history, Konstantin Antonov’s reflections on Olga Zhukova’s monograph and Gleb Yengovatov’s critique of John Gray’s book “The New Leviathans”.
A.M.
