My bookmarks
    You have no bookmarks yet.

Akira Seto on the difficulties in the debate on logic

Note 17. To the Subsection “Dialectical Logic

Примітка 17. До розділу “3.3. Марксистська логіка

According to Akira Seto, the following aporias (difficulties) arose as a result of the “Logic Debate” in the 1950s:

① The Aporia of the Reflection Theory of Logic (論理反映說): It was argued that the law of identity and the law of contradiction are, on the one hand, relative, as they are reflections of the relative unchangeability of objective phenomena, and on the other hand, absolute as the rules of operation of thought-forms. However, the counter-argument was made that if these laws are merely relative reflections of reality, then they can naturally possess only relative validity as laws of thought.

② The Aporia of the Operation Theory of Logic (論理造作說): Formal logic is the logic of operation in the sense that it is not concerned with the truthfulness of thinking, but with the validity of thinking. Therefore, it was asserted that the law of identity and the law of contradiction are not reflections of reality but are purely the laws and norms of thinking. However, the problem arises that recognizing independent laws of thought unrelated to existence would imply losing the materialistic foundation and falling into Kantian apriorism. (— [Contemporary Epistemology and Dialectic (Tokyo: Sekibunsha, 1976), 234-37.]). The aporia pointed out in the main text (Unification Logic) is this second one.

Seto's Proposal and Critique: As a way to solve the two aporias, Seto suggested recognizing that the two contradictions within the law of contradiction—the dialectical contradiction and the contradiction in formal logic—are originally different in nature. However, regarding the two contradictions as essentially different itself means losing the materialistic foundation. Moreover, as Seto himself pointed out, “This does not solve all problems. ...A question is raised as to the reason why the situation has arisen that the two essentially different contradictions are expressed in the law of contradiction at the same time” (Ibid., 250). Ultimately, the problems remain entirely unresolved.