The cognitivization of logic or why it is now that logic needs support from cognitive science: historical and methodical analysis
PDF (Українська)


Cognitive Science, Formal logic, Informal logic, thinking, reasoning, cognitivization

Abstract views: 92
PDF Downloads: 83

How to Cite

Reva, N. (2020). The cognitivization of logic or why it is now that logic needs support from cognitive science: historical and methodical analysis. Multiversum. Philosophical Almanac, 2(1), 171-186.


Fast technological progress has shifted the interests of scientists all around the world towards the Cognitive and Computer Science. Technological progress united scientists all around the world and gave a new possibilities to conduct more difficult and diverse studies. This change of interests and opportunities undoubtedly influenced the formation of a new type of thinking. Logic, as the science of a specific type of thinking, mostly studied in the form of logical reasoning, cannot be left out. However, as Logic, as a science, does not deal with all manifestations of human thinking, it may need to cooperate with other scientific domains, like Psychology and Cognitive Science, to get the complete picture of this phenomenon. In the article, the author present the possible cooperation of Logic with the Cognitive Science. The author starts with analyzing the methodological principles of the Cognitive Science, which are 1) the interdisciplinary issues that are taken under consideration, 2) an obligatory experimental part, which can be repeated by other scientists for checking, and 3) a one common formal language that can be understood all over the world with no difficulties. Then the author pays a specific attention to the duality of nature of Logic, as a scientific domain. As J. Wolenski put it, the difference is mainly between “being formal” in strict logical way and “being logical” in general way. The author shows how this ambivalence opens the prospects for cooperation with the Cognitive Science. To this end, the author makes historical and methodological review of both disciplines. Thus, the author shows that, on the one hand, the Formal logic created the basis for the modern development of the Artificial Intelligence. Moreover, until now it continue to invest a lot in the improvement of artificial formalized languages, which are actively used for programming the AI. On the other hand, the Informal logic, like the Cognitive Science, deals with the natural language studying, for example, the process of argumentation. This allows the Informal logic to approach real human thinking erroneous as it could be. In conclusion, the author shows how, applying the methodological basis of Cognitive Science to study the real course of human thinking, Logic, both Formal and Informal, can expand the horizons of its research from theoretical to practical and experimental domain. For instance, one of the possible joint work is the study of mental logical models established in humans mind. The other collaboration can be the study of correlation between the logical capability and logical competence of a person and cognitive biases he may have. Some of the mutual studies have already started by Ph. Johnson-Laird, D. O'Brien, and others; however, the most interesting joint researches are yet to come.
PDF (Українська)


Backsanskij, О. (2014). Convergence: methodology of mega-science. Filosofiya i kul'tura (Philosophy and culture). Vol. 4 (76), 505-518. [In Russian].

Backsanskij, О. (2017). Philosophy of modern education and epistemological anarchism of Paul Feyerabend. Kollektsiya gumanitarnykh issledovaniy (Collection of humanities research). Electronic scientific journal. Vol. 1(4), 16-23. [In Russian].

Lukyanets, V. (2016). Human potential in the perspective of «Industrialization 4.0». Naukovyy visnyk Natsionalʹnoho universytetu bioresursiv i pryro-?okorystuvannya Ukrayiny (Scientific Bulletin of the National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine. Humanities studies). Vol. 246, 110-118. [In Ukrainian].

Makovelsky, A. (2004). History of logic. Retrieved from: [In Russi-an].

Nesterova, M. (2016). Cognitive science: origins, challenges, prospects. Monograph. Sumy. University book. [In Russian].

Bochenski, I. M. (1961). A History of Formal Logic. University of Notre Dame Press.

Gefter, A. (2015). The Man Who Tried to Redeem the World with Logic. Nautilus, № 021. Retrieved from:

Haaparanta, L. (2009). The Development of Modern Logic. Oxford University Press.

Khomenko, І. (2018). A Look at Informal Logic. Future Human Image, Vol. 9, 52-62.

Mandler, G. (2001). Origins of the cognitive (r)evolution. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 38. рр. 1-32. Retrieved from:

Miller, G. A. (2003). The cognitive revolution: a historical perspective. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences Vol. 7 No. 3. рр. 141-144. Retrieved from:

Miller, G. A. (1956). The Magical Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on our Capacity for Processing Information. Psychological Review, № 63, 81-97. Retrieved from:

Pinker, S. (2002). The Blank Slate. Penguin Books. USA.

Pinker, S. (2011). The Cognitive Revolution. Harvard Gazette. Retrieved from:

Sedlаr, I., Sefrаnek J. (2014). Logic and cognitive science. In Artificial intelli-gence and Cognitive Science IV. Slovak University of Technology, Bratislava, p. 219-236.

Thagard, P. (2014). Cognitive Science. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philoso-phy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved from:

Wolenski, J. (2016). Logic in the light of Cognitive Science. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetorics, 48(61). Rzeszow, р. 87-101.

Wolenski, J. (2002). Metalogical Properties, Being Logical and Being Formal. Logic and Logical Philosophy, Volume 10, Krakow, р. 211-221.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


Download data is not yet available.