Posted on 3rd May 2017 23:46:35 in Proofreading
Let's take for illustration the first case when someone claims that "Rain is favorable for agriculture", and on another occasion the same person expresses the opposite idea: "Rain is unfavorable for agriculture." But both statements can be true and should be proofread. In the first case, we mean spring (before the emergence of plants). In the second case, fall (before harvesting). As an example of the second case, let's take the situation when one can say about Petrov's employee that he knows the English language well, since his knowledge meets the requirements of the university. However, this knowledge is not enough for his work as an interpreter. In this case, you can say: "Petrov does not know English well." In these judgments, Petrov's knowledge of the English language is considered from the point of view of different requirements, i.e. After proofreading, one and the same employee, if considered in different ways, gives grounds for opposing but equally true assessments.
In the scientific work can not be ignored and the requirement of the law of the excluded third. This law states that of two contradictory judgments one of them is false, and the other is true. There is no third. It is expressed by the formula: "A is either B or not B". For example, if the true proposition "Our firm is competitive", then the proposition "Our firm is not competitive" is false.
Such a law does not affect opposing judgments, i.e. On such judgments, each of which not only denies the other, but also informs additional information about it. Let's take two judgments: "This forest is coniferous" and "This forest is mixed". Here the second proposition does not simply deny the first, but gives additional information, i.e. It's not just that it's not true, as if this forest is coniferous, but it says what kind of forest it is.
The importance of the proofreading and editing of the excluded third for conducting scientific work is that it requires consistency in the presentation of facts and does not allow contradictions. Such a law formulates an important requirement for a scientist: one can not shy away from recognizing one of the two contradictory judgments as true and seek a third between them. If one of them is recognized as true, then the other must be recognized as false, and not seek a third, non-existent judgment, since the third is not given. The importance of observing the proofreading of the excluded third for scientists is also that it requires clear, definite answers from them, indicating the impossibility of seeking something in between the assertion of something and the negation of the same. The requirement of the proof of scientific conclusions, the validity of judgments, expresses the law of sufficient grounds, which is formulated as follows: every true thought has a sufficient basis. Any other idea can serve as a sufficient basis for any thought, from which the truth of the given thought necessarily follows.
Why do they say "sufficient reason", and not just "ground"? The fact is that for the same statement one can draw infinitely many reasons. However, only some of them can be considered sufficient if this statement is true. And none will be sufficient if it is false.
Thus, the proofreading of sufficient reason requires that any judgment that we use in the dissertation work, before being accepted as truth, must be justified. In all cases when we affirm something or convince of something, we must always prove our judgments, give sufficient grounds to confirm the truth of our statements, fixing attention on statements that justify the truth of the propositions put forward, this law helps to separate the true from the false And come to the right conclusion.
A significant part of the scientific information is of the nature of derivational judgments; Judgments that are not obtained by direct perception of some fragments of reality, but derived from other judgments, which, as it were, are extracted from their content. A logical means of obtaining such a conclusion is the inference, i.e. A thought operation by means of which from a certain number of given judgments a different proposition is deduced, connected in some way with the original one. All reasoning can be qualified as inductive and deductive. Deductive is called such a conclusion, in which the conclusion about some element of the set is made on the basis of knowledge of the general properties of the whole set. For example: "All metals are malleable, copper is metal." Therefore, copper has malleability. "
In this connection, the deductive method of cognition is understood as deductive inference. Thus, the content of deduction as a method of cognition is the use of general scientific positions in the study of specific phenomena. Deduction is advantageously different from other methods of cognition in that, with the truth of the original knowledge, it gives true deduced knowledge. However, it would be wrong to overestimate the scientific significance of the proofreading method, since without obtaining initial knowledge this method can not give anything. Therefore, the scientist first of all needs to learn how to use induction. By induction is usually understood as the conclusion from the particular to the general, when on the basis of knowledge of a part of the objects of the class a conclusion is drawn about the class as a whole. However, one can speak of induction in the broader sense of the word as a method of cognition, as an aggregate of cognitive operations, as a result of which the movement of thought from less general positions to positions more general is carried out by proofreading service. Consequently, the difference between induction and deduction is only revealed first of all in the directly opposite direction of the course of thought.