Logic and rhetoric as metatrops of disciplinary divisions in science and of «General» education

Annotation

The problem of the article is the role of logical proof and rhetorical justification, firstly, in the differentiation of scientific disciplines, and secondly, in the formation of a «general» education that allows understanding and applying scientific and non-scientific knowledge as a tool for achieving the common good. A philosophical and cultural-historical analysis is undertaken, within which logic and rhetoric are considered as metatropes, i. e. such cognitive means that make possible the unity, on the one hand, of scientific knowledge and its methods, playing the role of universal tropes in different disciplines, and, on the other hand, «general» knowledge, which every person who claims to be rational and whose purpose is practice in the perspective of the common good must possess. The article discusses the connection of logical proof with science, its methodological and philosophical foundations, touches upon some examples from the history of science, in particular, ancient history. Rhetorical justification is considered in connection with «general» education, which also originated in antiquity as a cycle of seven liberal arts and sciences. An analysis is given of its social functions and its connection with the concept of the common good. Among the knowledge known to us over the past two and a half millennia, mathematical and logical knowledge, as well as rhetoric, which stands for social knowledge as a whole, have undergone the least changes. It is shown that the discourse of rhetoric has a universal character, since it reflects the very essence of the human, so that all other forms of culture are introduced and rejected within the framework of communication about the common good and the implicit concept of the common good. The metatrope of rhetorical justification sets the discourse of this kind of practical philosophizing, preparation for which is provided by a «general» interdisciplinary education.

Keywords

logic, proof, rhetoric, general education, scientific discipline, common good.

Literature

1. Ado I. Liberal Arts and philosophy in ancient thought / translated by E. F. Shichalina. Moscow: The Greek-Latin Cabinet of D. A. Shichalin, 2002.
2 . Aristotle. The second analysis / translated by B. A. Fokhta // Aristotle. Essays in 4 volumes — vol. 2. Moscow: Mysl, 1978. pp. 255-345.
3. Aristotle. Categories / translated by A. V. Kubitsky // Aristotle. Essays in 4 volumes — vol. 2. Moscow: Mysl, 1978. pp. 51-89.
4. Aristotle. About animal parts / translated by V. P. Karpov. Moscow: State Publishing House. Biological and Medical literature, 1937.
5. Aristotle. Rhetoric / translated by N. Platonova // Ancient rhetoric / edited by A. A. Tahogodi. Moscow: Publishing House of Moscow State University, 1978.
6. Batkin L. M. The Italian Renaissance. Problems and people. Moscow: RGGU, 1995.
7. Benveniste E. Categories of thought and categories of language // General Linguistics. Moscow: URSS, 2002. pp. 104-114.
8. Bourdieu P. Homo academicus / translated under the editorship of E. V. Kochetygova and N. V. SavelvMoscow: Gaidar Institute Publishing House, 2018.
9. Husserl E. The Crisis of European Humanity and Philosophy // Questions of philosophy. - 1986. — No. 3. — pp. 101-116.
10. Dmitriev I. S. Unknown Newton: silhouette against the background of the epoch. St. Petersburg: Aleteya Publ., 1999.
11. Zhmud L. Ya. Experimentation in the Pythagorean school // Some problems of the history of ancient science. - L., 1989. — pp. 36-46.
12. Zaitsev A. I. Cultural revolution in Ancient Greece of the VIII–V centuries BC — St. Petersburg: Publishing House of the Faculty of Philology of St. Petersburg State University, 2000. 13. Latour B. David Bloor... and not only that: the answer to David Bloor's "Anti-Latour" // Logos. — 2017. — Vol. 27. — No. 1. — pp. 135-162. — URL: https://logosjournal.ru/articles/387346 / (date of access: 03/05/3023).
14. Latour B. Science in action / translated by K. Fedorova. — St. Petersburg: EU SPb, 2013.
15. Lyotard J.-F. The state of postmodernity / translated by N. A. Shmatko. St. Petersburg: Aleteya Publ., 1998.
16. Migunov A. I. On the question of the ontological foundations of logic // Logical and philosophical studies. — 2019. — Vol. 17. — No. 4. — pp. 257-279.
17. Panchenko D. V. Thales: the birth of philosophy and science // Some problems of the history of ancient science. — L., 1989. — pp. 16-36.
18. Panchenko D. V. Thales, solar eclipses and the emergence of science in Ionia at the beginning of the VI century BC // Hyperboreus. — 1996. — Vol. 2. — P. 47–124.
19. Sergeev K. A. Renaissance foundations of anthropocentrism. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg State University Publishing House, 1993.
20. Foucault M. The Will to Truth. Beyond Knowledge, Power and sexuality / translated from French— Moscow, 1996.
21. Chrzanowska-Kluczewska E. Microtropes, macrotropes, metatropes // AAA — Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik. — 2004. — Vol. 29. — S. 65-80. — URL.: http:// www.jstor.org/stable/43025720 (date of access: 03/05/3023).
22. Fuller S. The Military-Industrial Route to Interdisciplinarity // The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity / ed. by R. Frodeman, J. Th. Klein, R. C. S. Pacheco. Oxford University Press, 2017. — P. 53–67.
23. Garvin D. Making the case: Professional education for the world of practice // Harvard Magazine. — 2003. — Vol. 106. — P. 56-65. — URL: https://caseresources.hsph.harvard.edu/publications/making-case-professional-education-world-practic... (date of request: 03/05/3023).
24. Heinimann F. Eine vorplatonische Theorie der Techne // Sophistik / hrsg. von C. J. Classen. — Darmstadt, 1976. — S. 127–169.
25. Keane J. The Life and Death of Democracy. — London, New York, 2009.
26. Kraus M. From Figure to Argument: Contrarium in Roman Rhetoric // Pondering on problems of argumentation / eds. F. Van Eemeren, B. Garssen. — 2009. — Vol. 14. — P. 117–132. 27. Krohn W. Interdisciplinary Cases and Disciplinary Knowledge: Epistemic Challenges of Interdisciplinary Research // The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity / ed. by R. Frodeman,
J. Th. Klein, R. C. S. Pacheco. Oxford University Press, 2017. — P. 40–52.
28. Perelman Ch., Olbrechts-Tyteca L. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. —
Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1969.
29. Rosenwein B., Cristiani R. What is the History of Emotion? — Polity, 2018.
30. Sabherwal A., Ballew M. T., Linden van der S., et al. The Greta Thunberg effect:
Familiarity with Greta Thunberg predicts intentions to engage in climate activism in the United States // Journal of Applied Social Psychology. — 2021. — No 51(4). — P. 321–333.
31. Stearns P. N., Stearns C. Z. Emotionology: Clarifying the History of Emotions and Emotional Standards // The American Historical Review. — 1985. — Vol. 90. — No 4. — P. 813–836.
32. Turner S. Knowledge Formations: An Analytic Framework // The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity / ed. by R. Frodeman, J. Th. Klein, R. C. S. Pacheco. — Oxford University Press, 2017. — P. 9–20.
33. Wende van der M. The Emergence of Liberal Arts and Sciences Education in Europe: A Comparative Perspective // Higher Education Policy. — 2011. — Vol. 24. — P. 233–253.