David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Contemporary Chinese Thought 13 (4):66-78 (1982)
Whether or not the law of sufficient reason is a basic law of formal logic is a question that merits in-depth discussion. Back in the 1960s, when discussion was held on the object and function of formal logic, some comrades were of the opinion that formal logic should not be confined to the study of the form of thinking. One of their arguments was "the law of sufficient reason requires that the contents of the premise be true." Similarly, in the discussion of the truthfulness and correctness of formal logic, some comrades also held that the correctness of the form of thinking and the truthfulness of its contents are a unity. Their opinion supposed that "it is one of the requirements of the law of sufficient reason that the reason must be true." All these discussions involved the nature of the law. Therefore the current discussion is a continuation and deepening of the previous discussions on logic. It involves not only the content of the law of sufficient reason as well as its role and position in formal logic, but also the object under the study of formal logic as a branch of science and the direction of its future development. Doubtlessly, the discussion of this issue bears major significance
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Ma Pei (1982). The Law of Sufficient Reason is a Major Law of Formal Logic. Contemporary Chinese Thought 13 (4):54-65.
Nectarios G. Limnatis (2006). The Canon and the Organon of Thought. Idealistic Studies 36 (2):123-139.
T. Achourioti & M. van Lambalgen (2011). A Formalization of Kant's Transcendental Logic. Review of Symbolic Logic 4 (2):254-289.
William S. Cooper (2001). The Evolution of Reason: Logic as a Branch of Biology. Cambridge University Press.
Andrews Reath (2010). Formal Principles and the Form of a Law. In Andrews Reath & Jens Timmermann (eds.), Kant's Critique of Practical Reason: A Critical Guide. Cambridge University Press.
Jean-Yves Beziau (2008). What is “Formal Logic”? Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 13:9-22.
John Edwin Gurr (1959). The Principle of Sufficient Reason in Some Scholastic Systems, 1750-1900. Marquette University Press.
Ralph H. Johnson (1999). The Relation Between Formal and Informal Logic. Argumentation 13 (3):265-274.
W. C. Kneale (1962/1984). The Development of Logic. Oxford University Press.
Arthur Schopenhauer (1974). On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason. La Salle, Ill.,Open Court.
Andrew J. I. Jones & Marek Sergot (1992). Deontic Logic in the Representation of Law: Towards a Methodology. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (1):45-64.
Added to index2010-12-11
Total downloads4 ( #289,172 of 1,410,463 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #177,872 of 1,410,463 )
How can I increase my downloads?