Conceptual form of thinking. Forms and types of thinking. Pragmatic thinking style

International University of Nature, Society and Human "Dubna"

Essay

in cultural studies on the topic:

“Primitive thinking according to L. Levy-Bruhl”

Completed by: Karmazina T.A.

Dubna, 2008

Introduction

Background of thinking

Primitive thinking

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

The development of human society is the history of the development of human essence. The main component of this process is the development of human thinking.

Thinking, like the ability to work, undergoes a complex process of development from an ancient predecessor to the thought of modern man. Thought is the result and means of material labor, which transforms man himself and the natural environment. Thought goes through historical stages of development, otherwise its history will be represented by a sequence of paradigms.

The life of human society consists of the remnants of the former ways of life of mankind. The thinking of a person living today consists of fragments of experienced historical types of thinking: religious and mythological. The development of thinking is the core of the development of spiritual culture. The study of the processes of its development is the main condition for understanding the thinking of modern man and his further development.

The study of collective ideas, their connections, combinations in lower societies will help shed light on the genesis of modern logical principles.

To better clarify these features, I will compare them with our thinking in this paper. This way we run less risk of missing them.

The Nature of Human Thinking

Human intelligence is an important property. Man, from the position of scientific materialism, is the result of the endless development of matter. Man is the result of a single systematic world process, which is formed sequentially: biological, physical and chemical forms of matter. Man is the only formation in the world, the essence of which is the finale of the continuous creation of oneself. Containing within itself the enormous wealth of the material world, man has the ability to understand and transform the world, work, and think.

Meaning human existence determines the direction of development of human essence, the meaning of its existence. Human development occurs in the process of creating a “second nature”. Consequently, it has “external reference points” - the exploration of the world in breadth and depth. But the actual human qualities in this movement lie in the development of the human essence itself, its movement in knowing itself. A person has no internal guidelines in his development other than the development of his essence and deepening into it. Specifically speaking, the meaning of human existence must be presented as an enrichment of the nature of work and the abilities of human thinking.

Background of thinking

The predecessor of human intelligence is “concrete thinking,” or, as it is also called, thinking in sensory images. The emergence of concrete thinking is still poorly understood. Scientists suggest that the psyche of higher animals is based on two types of reactions - instincts and associations (temporary connections). Instincts are innate, species-specific forms of behavior that are inherited and developed as a result of biological evolution. The formation of associations occurs during individual adaptation to the environment and are a reflection of external connections between different environmental phenomena perceived by animals.

Primitive thinking

The study of primitive thinking presents great difficulties, since the use of experiments is hardly possible here. An important indicator of the formation and development of primitive thinking are the means of labor of ancient man that have survived to our time. The movement of the human mind begins with the first achievement of man - the creation of the first tools. The human way of life has determined the first and most important paradigm of human thinking - the objectivity of the reflection of reality, the correspondence of thought to reality. The main condition for human development is the knowledge of the phenomenological manifestations of the laws of nature.

Ancient man needed to have extensive observations and knowledge of the system of natural phenomena. It must be assumed that human thinking during this period of development had the simplest logic. She was needed to track the logic natural connections, on which human existence depended.

In the process of the formation of thinking, obviously, the four basic logical laws gradually took shape - identity, contradiction, sufficient reason, excluded middle. But these laws are characteristic only of a sufficiently mature and developed human intellect, but the time of their final formation in the human intellect is quite difficult to establish. Most likely, this should be attributed to the period of ancient intelligence. It can be assumed that at a relatively high level of development of the initial labor and intellect of man, ancient man was faced with the task of explaining a system of natural phenomena; in this regard, we can say that a new level of thinking appears - explanatory. The famous researcher of primitive thinking, Lévy-Bruhl, distinguished between individual and collective thinking. He believed that individual thinking is based on the general laws of formal logic, otherwise man would not survive the struggle for existence. However, collective thinking was paralogical. Its basis was the law of participation or complicity, according to which ancient man imagined that a perceived object could be simultaneously present in different places, i.e. the image of an object is identical to the object itself (therefore, influencing the image of an animal entails future success in hunting). Pre-logical thinking, as Lévy-Bruhl believed, was embodied in collective rituals and myths. The concept of this thinking was criticized by Soviet and foreign science.

An interesting point of view on primitive thinking was held by the French ethnologist K. Lévi-Strauss. He sought to reveal the originality of primitive thinking. The ethnologist is characterized by a high appreciation of the moral foundations of primitive society. He created the concept of “super-rationalism”, aimed at restoring the unity of the sensual principle, lost by modern European civilization. In his opinion, such unity was in the thinking of primitive society.

Levi-Strauss, politicizing with L. Levi-Bruhl, argued that ideas about a different way of thinking among peoples living in conditions of primitive cultures are not justified. He believed that their thought processes proceed in the same way as those of civilized living people, only the methods of generalization and ideas about the general differ, and the set of the most general concepts or categories is different. The works of C. Lévi-Strauss revealed the logical mechanism for creating and overcoming contradictions in the primitive consciousness with the help of mythological meditation, as well as the ability of primitive thinking for logical analysis. But despite this, for me, Lévy-Bruhl’s point of view is closer, in my opinion it is more detailed, and also seems more convincing. In the works of Levi-Strauss, in my opinion, the opinion of primitive society is exaggerated in terms of the level of intelligence and the course of thinking. But there is no need to overestimate the logical nature of primitive thinking, turning the laws of logic into an easy and quick gift of human thought. Logical thinking could not take shape immediately, but had to go through a series of certain stages, starting with immature, undeveloped logical thinking, a contradiction, an excluded third, a sufficient basis. Many people think that primitive thinking arose with such a phenomenon as the “logic of things”, stable, constantly repeating connections with natural phenomena. Thanks to this logic, formal logical laws were created. It is necessary to distinguish between a “layer” of thinking, which is associated with a chain of observed, constantly repeating natural phenomena, and another: an “explanatory” layer, in which the formation of logic occurred in a complex way. Therefore, it is necessary to distinguish between the processes of logicalization of the immediate (specific level of thinking) and other thinking - explanatory. “Pre-logical thinking,” according to Lévy-Bruhl, clearly belonged to the latter. In the thinking of ancient man, two main paradigms emerged: illusory and realistic. Realism consists of seeing things as they are in themselves, without any other phenomena. This paradigm had a very strong biological basis, because the easily adaptable lifestyle of the animal determines the reflection environment. The second paradigm, the paradigm of realism, received much more confirmation with the advent of a social way of life, since the transformation of the natural environment requires adequacy of reflection, without which there would be no creation of a “second nature”. But the realistic paradigm can be observed at all stages of human history; it determines all the successes of human intelligence. At a certain stage of its development, it reaches its philosophical expression, mostly in the form of materialism, which elevates this paradigm to the level of a high and productive abstraction. Some properties of the realistic paradigm, of course, appeared in the field of idealistic concepts and turned out to be materialistic in content.

The emergence of the anthropomorphic paradigm with the emergence of a layer of explanatory thinking has become a necessary and irreversible step in human thinking. The ancient man could explain all natural phenomena, their regularity, and the time of occurrence only by the fact that nature has its own mind and thinking. The actions of nature were explained as deliberate, and began to be attributed to various spirits and beings. The human psyche is structured in such a way that one’s own meaningful actions, even in the early stages of development, become the subject of observation and awareness. The nature of human activity contains the beginning of an explanation of natural phenomena based on the model of one’s conscious actions. This is easily detected in the psychology of a child when he begins to attribute good and bad qualities to things. Since for primitive man a meaningful action seemed natural and ordinary, as a result natural phenomena were easier to explain by the presence of consciousness, will, and intentions.

As a result, they believed that nature needed to be respected and appeased, because it was on it that their lives depended. Let us give examples of such beliefs.

Animism. Faith in primitive human society was associated with primitive mythological beliefs and was based on such a concept as animism. Animism (from Latin anima - spirit, soul) - the assignment of human qualities to natural phenomena. E.B. Tyler first introduced this concept to define the first stage in the history of the development of religion.

Magic. It is the most ancient form of religion (and comes from the Greek megeia - magic). Magic represents a set of specific actions, with a special meaning, also including rituals.

The essence of magic is still undiscovered and unexplored in comparison with other religions. Some scholars, such as the ethnologist James Freder (1854-1941), consider it the parent of religion. And another ethnologist and sociologist A. Virkandt (1867-1953) considers magic the main means of development religious ideas. And the Russian ethnographer L.Ya. Sternberg (1861-1927) believes that it is a product of early animistic beliefs. But one thing is likely - “magic brightened up, if not entirely, then to a significant extent, the thinking of primitive man and was closely connected with the development of belief in the supernatural.”

Fetishism. One of the types of magic (comes from the French fetiche - talisman, amulet, idol). Fetishism is the belief in the divine powers of inanimate objects that have supernatural powers. Objects of worship are stones, flowers, trees, any objects. Moreover, they can be both naturally created and man-made. Types of veneration: making sacrifices, driving nails into them to cause pain to the spirit and force it to fulfill a request.

Belief in amulets (derived from Arabic gamala - to wear). This religion is believed to originate from primitive fetishism and magic. Faith was identified with any object, which, according to the savage, was endowed with magical powers and the ability to protect the owner from various troubles.

Totemism. Among ancient people, the worship of animals and trees played a significant role. Ancient man imagined the world as animate. He believed that every object has a soul, like a person, and communicated with them as equals. When a savage named himself after an animal, considered it equal in blood, and refrained from killing it, then such an animal was considered totemic (derived from the northern Indian ototem - its genus). Totetism is the belief in family ties by blood between a genus and certain plants or animals, sometimes natural phenomena.

According to historical data, the first type of explanatory thinking was myth. It was an attempt to explain the world. Myth serves as a precursor to the scientific worldview. Myths tell about events of the past, future, the appearance of the world, God, and animals. There are cosmogonic myths, ethnographic ones, about the seasons, weather phenomena, heroes, etc. In most myths about the universe, the initial stage is considered as the emergence of the world from the initial chaos. Then we got the earth, people, gods, animals. In myths one can clearly distinguish elements of realism and materialism, because... the gods are the result of order emerging from chaos. But what remains in the myths is dominated by the work of the gods, and invented animals with human traits. The anthropomorphic paradigm forms the basis of the mythological type of thinking.

Myths contained the initial ideas of chaos, gods, animals, and people. They included the beginnings of later abstractions of law and regularity (the emergence of order from chaos), matter, gods, etc. Also clothed in the form of images. Myths include special laws that regulate people's behavior, define social prohibitions, and act as regulators of public life.

The mythological type of thinking entered the next, higher, form of thinking - the religious type of thinking. It has also been preserved in a rather independent form, although in new forms, in the structure of the intellect of modern man

Religion is a more complex phenomenon of the spiritual life of society, compared to mythology. It contains a system of certain beliefs about supernatural forces - gods. Religion arose about 40-50 thousand years ago, but in its original form it differed little from mythology, because it absorbs a significant part of the myths. In religion there is the presence of an increasingly complex creed, a system of views that is becoming more and more abstract - one of the most important differences religion from myth. At the same time, religion always retains a largely figurative character, expressing dogma in the form of images, which makes it accessible to all segments of society.

The cult of gods and saints is characteristic feature, the ritual side is also very developed, which includes a lot borrowed from magical thinking and actions. Religion also includes a special social aspect - the church. Religion appears as a more developed form of thinking than mythology, based on the paradigm of fantastic explanation, or the anthropomorphic paradigm. “Consideration of the world in the image, likeness of man and conscious human action” acquires in religion, especially in ancient times the brightest character. The heart of any religion is the gods or a single god, who have human properties enhanced many times over - reason, mercy, will, etc. The anthropomorphism of religion was noted by various thinkers, from the ancient philosopher Xenophanes to the philosopher of the 19th century. L. Feuerbach.

Back in the nineteenth century, it was believed that primitive religions were characterized by two concepts that distinguished them from other world religions. The first was that their main motive was fear (fear of punishment by spirits), the second was that representatives of primitive religions were an integral part of ideas about uncleanliness and unhygiene. Because almost all descriptions of primitive religions left by travelers included stories about the eternal horror and fear such people live in. It talks about beliefs about terrible misfortunes that happen to those who suddenly accidentally cross some forbidden barrier or deal with something unclean. Since fear covers the entire consciousness, it is useful to take this fact into account when considering other ideas of primitive consciousness, in particular, ideas about the unclean.

It is not known for certain how old the ideas of pure and unclean are in any non-literate culture: for its representatives they must seem eternal and unchanging.

A person who belongs to any culture from birth is more likely to believe that he only passively perceives the ideas of his world about the forces and dangers that exist in it, without noticing the small changes that he could make to them. In the same way, we believe that we are just passively perceiving our native language, and we do not notice our involvement in the shifts occurring in it during our lives. That is why I believe that the culture under study should not be considered as a long-established value system. True, the opposite is also possible.

How much more will we learn about any primitive religions, the more and more clear is the fact that in symbolic structures there is still a place for the great secrets of both religion and philosophy.

conclusion

To summarize this work, I can say that according to these data, for the most part, primitive thinking differs from ours. It has other guidelines. Modern people, they look for secondary causes in any actions, but primitive man sees exclusively mystical causes, because everywhere it seems to him that otherworldly forces are at work. He can admit that a being can be in different places at the same time. He is absolutely indifferent to contradictions, while our mind cannot agree with them. This is why we can call such thinking, in comparison with our prological one. Collective ideas (in general terms) can be determined by the following characteristics: transmitted from generation to generation; are imposed by individuals, who then awaken feelings of fear, respect, etc. These ideas do not depend on the individual, they cannot be understood by considering the individual. For primitive man there is no obvious physical fact in the way we attach to this word. Rain, wind, or any other natural phenomenon were not perceived by ancient people the way they are perceived by us (as complex movements that are in complex dependence with other phenomena). Physical properties, of course, are perceived by their senses, just like ours, and the entire psychophysiological process of perception is carried out in exactly the same way as in modern man. Primitive people see the same as we do, but they do not perceive with the same consciousness as we do. For our society, ghosts, brownies, etc. are something related to the realm of the supernatural: for us these are visions, magical manifestations, they are all on one side, and the facts known as a result of perception and everyday experience are on the other side, because in modern thinking there is a clear line separating these concepts. For primitive man, such a line does not exist. A religious and often superstitious person usually believes in two systems, in two worlds - one is the world of visible things, subject to the inevitable laws of motion, and the other - invisible, intangible things. But for the primitive consciousness there is only one world. Any reality is mystical, like everything else, which means that any perception is mystical. The mystical relationships that are so often captured in the relationships between beings and objects by primitive consciousness have one common basis. They are all in different shapes and, to varying degrees, imply the presence of involvement between beings or objects associated with a collective representation. It is for this reason, on this issue, that I agree with Lévy-Bruhl and his “law of participation.” Collective ideas are not the product of intellectual processing in the proper sense of the word. And most importantly, instead of logical relations (inclusions and exclusions), they imply participles.

Bibliography

1. History of human intelligence / Perm. univ. – Perm, 1998. – Part 1,2. Prehistory – myth – religion. Education.

2. Lévy-Bruhl L. Supernatural in primitive thinking / Trans. Ed. VC. Nikolsky and A.V. Kisin M., 1999 p. 7-372

3. Vojvodina LN Mythology and culture Textbook. Manual M., 2002 p. 115-116

Thinking - process cognitive activity individual, characterized generalized and indirect a reflection of reality.

The first feature of thinking- his mediated character. What a person cannot know directly, directly, he knows indirectly, indirectly: some properties through others, the unknown - through the known. Thinking always relies on data from sensory experience -sensations, perceptions , representation - and on previously acquired theoretical knowledge.

The second feature of thinking- his generality. Generalization as knowledge of the general and essential in the objects of reality is possible because all the properties of these objects are connected with each other. General exists and manifests itself only in the individual, in the concrete.

Generalizationspeople express throughspeech, language.

The results of people's cognitive activity are recorded in the form of concepts.

Concept- There is reflection of essential features subject. The concept of an object arises on the basis of many judgments and conclusions about it.

Judgment - This form of thinking , reflecting objects d reality in their connections and relationships X. Each judgment is a separate thought about something. Consistent logical connection of several judgments necessary in order to solve any mental problem, understand something, find an answer to a question, called reasoning.

Inference- This conclusion from several judgments giving us new knowledge about objects and phenomena objective world.

Inferencesthere are - inductive, deductive and analogical.

Thinking is the highest level of cognitiona man of reality. The sensory basis of thinking are sensations, perceptions and ideas . Through the senses - these are the only channels of communication between the body and the outside world - information enters the brain. The content of information is processed by the brain. The most complex (logical) form of information processing is the activity of thinking.

Thinking is not only closely connected with sensations and perceptions, but it is formed on the basis of them.

Transition from sensation to thought- a complex process that consists, first of all, of isolation and segregation an object or a sign of it, in abstraction from the specific, singular and establishing essential, general for many items.

For human thinking more significantly relationship not with sensory knowledge, but with speech and language.

In a more strict sense speech - the process of communication, language-mediated . If language- objective, historically established code system and the subject of a special science - linguistics, then speech is psychological process formulating and conveying thoughts means language.

Under inner speech psychology implies significant transitional stage between the plan and the expanded external speech Yu.

Thinking is also inextricably linked and with practical activities of people .

Any type of activity assumes: deliberation, taking into account conditions actions, planning, observation . By acting, a person solves some problems.

Practical activities - about main conditions e emergence and development of thinking, as well as truth criterion thinking.

Mental operations are varied. This is analysis and synthesis, comparison, abstraction, specification, generalization, classification.

Analysis - This is the mental decomposition of the whole into parts or the mental isolation of its sides, actions, and relationships from the whole.

Synthesis- the opposite process of thought to analysis, this is the unification of parts, properties, actions, relationships into one whole.

Analysis and synthesis - two interconnected logical operations. Synthesis, like analysis, can be both practical and mental.

Analysis and synthesis were formed in the practical activities of man. IN labor activity people constantly interact with objects and phenomena. Their practical mastery led to the formation of mental operations of analysis and synthesis.

Comparison- this is the establishment of similarities and differences between objects and phenomena.

Comparison based on analysis. Before comparing objects, it is necessary to identify one or more of their characteristics by which the comparison will be made.

Comparison may be one-sided, or incomplete, and multilateral, or more complete. Comparison as analysis and synthesis, can be of different levels - superficial and deeper. In this case, a person’s thought goes from external signs of similarity and difference to internal ones, from visible to hidden, from appearance to essence.

Abstraction - it's a process mental distraction from some signs, aspects of a particular thing in order to better understand it.

A person mentally identifies some feature of an object and examines it in isolation from all other features, temporarily distracting from them. Thanks to abstraction a person was able to break away from the individual, concrete and rise to the highest stage of knowledge - scientific theoretical thinking.

Specification- process, inverse of abstraction and inextricably linked with it.

Specification There is return of thought from the general and abstract to the concrete for the purpose of disclosing the content.

Generalization Thus, there is a selection of the general in objects and phenomena, which is expressed in the form of a concept, law, rule, formula, etc.

Divided into theoretical and practical .

IN theoretical thinking is distinguished conceptual and figurative thinking,

A in practical - visual-effective, visual-figurative and verbal-logical thinking.

Conceptual thinking is the kind of thinking in which certain concepts are used .

Figurative thinking - is a type of thought process in which images are used. These images extracted directly from memory or recreated by imagination. In the course of solving mental problems, the corresponding images are mentally transformed t so that as a result of manipulating them we can find a solution to the problem that interests us

Most often this type of thinking predominates among people whose activities associated with any type of creativity.

Conceptual and figurative thinking, being varieties of theoretical thinking, in practice are in constant interaction . They complement each other, revealing to us different aspects of existence.

Visual-effective thinking -This special kind thinking, the essence of which is practical transformative activities carried out with real objects. - a type of thinking based on direct perception of objects. It is in this type of thinking V to the greatest extent unity of thought and will is manifested.

Presented by people employed production labor , result which is the creation of any material product.

Visual-figurative thinking -it is a type of thought process that is carried out directly when perceiving the surrounding reality And without this it cannot be carried out. - a type of thinking characterized based on ideas and images. - distracted thoughts generalizations a person embodies into specific images.

By thinking visually and figuratively, we are tied to reality, and the necessary images are represented in short-term and operative memory.

This form thinking is dominant in preschool children and primary school age.

Verbal and logical thinking –type of thinking carried out using logical operations with concepts. It operates mainly concepts, broad categories, and images and ideas play a supporting role in it.

Highest level of thinking- abstract, abstract thinking. However, here too the thinking maintains connection with practice

It is formed over a long period (from 7-8 to 18-20 years old) in progress mastering concepts and logical operations during training .

Theoreticalthinking counts more perfect than practical, A conceptual represents higher level of development than figurative.

In the process of life in the same person Now one or another type of thinking comes to the fore.

The structural unit of practically effective (operational) thinking is action; artistic - image; scientific thinking - concept.

Depending from the depth of generality distinguish between empirical and theoretical thinking.

Empirical thinking(from Greek empeiria - experience) gives primary generalizations based experience . These generalizations are made at a low level of abstraction. Empirical knowledge is the lowest, elementary stage of knowledge. Empirical thinking should not be confused with practical thinking.

Feature practical thinking is thin observation, ability focus on individual details events,. Practical thinking associated with the operational setting priority goals, production of flexible plans, programs , greater self-control in stressful operating conditions.

Theoreticalthinking reveals universal relationships, explores an object knowledge of the system of its necessary connections. His result- construction conceptual models, Creation theories, generalization of experience, revealing patterns. .

Depending from standard/non-standard tasks to be solved and operational procedures There are differences between algorithmic, discursive, heuristic and creative thinking.

Algorithmic thinking focused on pre-established rules, a generally accepted sequence of actions necessary to solve typical problems.

Discursive(from Latin discursus - reasoning) thinking based on a system of interrelated inferences.

Heuristic thinking(from the Greek heuresko - I find) is productive thinking, consisting of solving non-standard problems.

Creative thinking- thinking that leads to new discoveries, fundamentally new results.

There are also reproductive and productive thinking .

Reproductive thinking- playback previously obtained results . In this case, thinking merges with memory.

Productive thinking- thinking, leading to new cognitive results.

Related information.

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

State educational institution of higher professional education

Leningrad State University named after. A.S. Pushkin

Course work

"ThinkingHowmentalprocess»

Performed:

2nd year student

correspondence department of KpiSP

Evstafieva A.V.

Checked:

Associate Professor, PhD in Psychology sciences

Aleshkin N.I.

Saint Petersburg,

general characteristics thinking

Sensory cognition and thinking

Thinking and speech

Social nature of thinking

Logic and psychology of thinking

Thinking as a process

Analysis and synthesis

Motivation thinking

Thinking and problem solving

Problem situation and task

Determination of thinking as a process

Thinking while solving problems

Types of thinking

Visual-effective thinking

Visual-figurative thinking

Abstract thinking

Individual characteristics of thinking

Literature

General characteristics of thinking

A person’s life constantly presents him with acute and urgent tasks and problems. The emergence of such problems, difficulties, surprises means that in the reality around us there is still a lot of unknown, incomprehensible, unforeseen, hidden, requiring an ever deeper knowledge of the world, the discovery in it of more and more new processes, properties and relationships of people and things. The Universe is infinite, and the process of understanding it is endless. Thinking is always directed into these endless depths of the unknown, the new. Every person makes many discoveries in his life (it doesn’t matter that these discoveries are small, only for himself, and not for humanity). For example, every schoolchild, solving a learning problem, necessarily discovers something new for himself.

Thinking is a socially conditioned, inextricably linked with speech, mental process of searching and discovering something essentially new, a process of indirect and generalized reflection of reality in the course of analysis and synthesis. Thinking arises on the basis of practical activity from sensory knowledge and goes far beyond its limits.

Sensory cognition and thinking

Cognitive activity begins with sensations and perceptions. Any, even the most developed, thinking always maintains a connection with sensory knowledge, that is, with sensations, perceptions and ideas. Mental activity receives all its material from only one source - from sensory knowledge. Through sensations and perceptions, thinking is directly connected with the outside world and is its reflection. The correctness (adequacy) of this reflection is continuously verified in the process of practical transformation of nature and society.

The sensory picture of the world that our sensations and perceptions give us every day is necessary, but not sufficient for its deep, comprehensive knowledge. In this sensory picture of the reality directly observed by us, the most complex interactions are almost not dissected various items, events, phenomena, etc., their causes and consequences, mutual transitions into each other. It is simply impossible to unravel this tangle of dependencies and connections, which appears in our perception in all its colorfulness and spontaneity, with the help of sensory knowledge alone. For example, the feeling of warmth given by a hand touching an object ambiguously characterizes the thermal state of the latter. This sensation is determined, firstly, by the thermal state of the given object and, secondly, by the state of the person himself (in the second case, everything depends on which bodies - warmer or colder - the person touched before). Already in this simplest example, both of these dependencies appear for sensory cognition as one undivided whole. In perception, only the general, summary result of the interaction of the subject (person) with the cognizable object is given. But in order to live and act, one must, first of all, know what objects are in themselves, that is, objectively, regardless of how they are perceived by a person, and, in general, regardless of whether they are cognized or not.

Since within the framework of sensory cognition alone it is impossible to fully dissect such a general, total, direct effect of the interaction of a subject with a cognizable object, a transition from sensations and perceptions to thinking is necessary. In the course of thinking, further, deeper knowledge of the external world is realized. As a result, it is possible to dismember and unravel the most complex interdependencies between objects, events, and phenomena.

Let's use the simplest example of determining the thermal state of a body. Thanks to thinking, it becomes possible to separate and abstract each of the two indicated dependencies from each other. This is achieved through indirect cognition. The dependence on the state of the person determining the thermal state of the object is simply excluded, since the temperature of the object can be measured indirectly - using a thermometer, and not directly - through the thermal sensations of the hand touching it. As a result, the sensory image of an object is now uniquely determined only by the object itself, that is, objectively. This is how abstract, abstract, indirect thinking operates, which seems to be distracted from some properties of an object in order to gain a deeper understanding of its other properties.

In the process of thinking, using the data of sensations, perceptions and ideas, a person at the same time goes beyond the limits of sensory knowledge, that is, he begins to cognize such phenomena of the surrounding world, their properties and relationships that are not directly given in perceptions and therefore are not directly observable . For example, physicists study the properties of elementary particles that cannot be seen even with the most powerful modern microscope. In other words, they are not directly perceived: they cannot be seen - they can only be thought about. Thanks to abstract, abstract, indirect thinking, it was possible to prove that such invisible elementary particles still exist in reality and have certain properties. These properties of particles that are not directly observable are learned in the process of thinking, again in an indirect, not direct, i.e., indirect, way.

Thus, thinking begins where sensory knowledge is no longer sufficient or even powerless. Thinking continues and develops the cognitive work of sensations, perceptions and ideas, going far beyond their limits. We can easily understand, for example, that an interplanetary spacecraft moving at a speed of 50,000 kilometers per second will move to a distant star six times slower than a beam of light , whereas we are not able to directly perceive or imagine the difference in the speed of bodies moving at a speed of 300,000 kilometers per second and 50,000 kilometers per second. In the real cognitive activity of each person, sensory cognition and thinking continuously transform into one another and mutually condition each other.

Thinking and speech

For human mental activity, its relationship is essential not only with sensory cognition, but also with language and speech. This reveals one of the fundamental differences between the human psyche and the psyche of animals. The elementary, primitive thinking of animals always remains only visually effective; it cannot be abstract, mediated by cognition. It is connected only with directly perceived objects that are currently in front of the animal’s eyes, and does not go beyond the visual-effective plane.

Only with the advent of speech does it become possible to “separate” one or another of its properties from a cognizable object and consolidate, fix the idea or concept of it in a special word. A thought acquires in a word the necessary material shell, only in which does it become an immediate reality for other people and for ourselves. Human thinking, no matter what forms it takes, is impossible without language. Every thought arises and develops in inextricable connection with speech. The deeper and more thoroughly thought out this or that thought, the more clearly and clearly it is expressed in words, verbally and writing. And vice versa, the more the verbal formulation of a thought is improved and honed, the clearer and more understandable this thought itself becomes.

Special observations during psychological experiments show that some schoolchildren and even adults often experience difficulties in solving a problem until they formulate their reasoning out loud. When the solvers begin to specifically and more clearly formulate and pronounce one after another the main reasoning (even if at first clearly erroneous), then such thinking out loud usually makes solving the problem easier. By formulating his thoughts out loud for others, a person thereby formulates them for himself. Such formulation, consolidation, and recording of thoughts in words means the division of thoughts, helps to focus attention on various moments and parts of this thought and contributes to a deeper understanding of it. Thanks to this, detailed, consistent, systematic reasoning becomes possible, that is, a clear and correct comparison of all the main thoughts that arise in the thinking process.

The word, the formulation of thought, thus contains the most important necessary prerequisites for discursive, i.e., reasoning, logically dissected and conscious thinking. Thanks to the formulation and consolidation in the word, the thought does not disappear or fade away, barely having time to arise. It is firmly fixed in speech formulation, oral or even written. Therefore, there is always the opportunity, if necessary, to return to this thought again, think it over even more deeply, check it and, in the course of reasoning, correlate it with other thoughts. The formulation of thoughts in the speech process is the most important condition for their formation. The so-called inner speech can also play a large role in this process: when solving a problem, a person thinks not out loud, but to himself, as if talking only to himself.

Thus, human thinking is inextricably linked with language, with speech. Thinking necessarily exists in a material, verbal shell.

Social nature of thinking

The organic, inextricable connection between thinking and language clearly reveals the social, socio-historical essence of human thinking. Cognition necessarily presupposes the continuity of all knowledge acquired in the course of human history. This historical continuity of knowledge is possible only if it is recorded, consolidated, preserved and transmitted from one person to another, from generation to generation. Such recording of all the main results of knowledge is carried out with the help of language - in books, magazines, etc. In all this, the social nature of human thinking is clearly manifested. Mental development human development is necessarily accomplished in the process of assimilation of knowledge developed by humanity in the course of socio-historical development. The process of cognition of the world by an individual is determined by the historical development of scientific knowledge, the results of which each individual masters during training. In fact, it is communication between man and humanity.

During the entire period of schooling, a ready-made, established system of knowledge, concepts, etc., discovered and developed by man during the entire previous history, appears before the child. But in this way, what is known to humanity and is not new to it inevitably turns out to be initially unknown and new to every child. Therefore, mastering the entire historically accumulated wealth of knowledge requires great mental effort and serious creative work from the child, although he masters a ready-made system of concepts, and masters it under the guidance of adults. Consequently, the fact that children assimilate knowledge already known to mankind and do this with the help of adults does not exclude, but, on the contrary, presupposes the need for independent thinking in children. Otherwise, the assimilation of knowledge will be purely formal, superficial, thoughtless, and mechanical. Thus, mental activity is a necessary basis both for the assimilation of knowledge (for example, by children) and for the acquisition of completely new knowledge (primarily by scientists) in the course of the historical development of mankind.

Logic and psychology of thinking

In the process of socio-historical development of knowledge and transformation of nature and society, scientific knowledge is generated, developed and systematized. In other words, a set of basic achievements and results of knowledge recorded with the help of language, formed into a system of science - physics, chemistry, biology, sociology, psychology, etc., arises and continuously increases. This historical development of knowledge and the resulting system of scientific knowledge constitutes the subject theory of knowledge, i.e. epistemology as part of philosophy and logic. The theory of knowledge as a philosophical discipline explores the most general patterns of all cognitive activity. For example, she explores the emergence and development in the course of human history of such categories as “being”, “matter”, “consciousness”, “quality”, “quantity”. On the basis of philosophical, extremely general principles of the theory of knowledge, human thinking is studied by two complementary specific, private sciences - formal logic and psychology.

Logic studies the logical forms of thinking - concepts, judgments and inferences.

A concept is a thought that reflects the general, essential and distinctive (specific) characteristics of objects and phenomena of reality. For example, the concept of “person” includes such essential features as labor activity, production of tools, and articulate speech. All this distinguishes people from animals. The content of concepts is revealed in judgments, which are always expressed in verbal form - oral or written, out loud or silently.

Judgment is a reflection of the connections between objects and phenomena of reality or between their properties and characteristics. For example, the proposition: “Metals expand when heated,” expresses the connection between temperature changes and the volume of metals. By thus establishing various connections and relationships between concepts, judgments are statements made by someone about something. They affirm or deny any relationships between objects, events, and phenomena of reality. For example, when we say: “The earth revolves around the sun,” we thereby affirm the existence of a certain objective connection in space between two celestial bodies.

Judgments can be general, particular and individual. In general judgments, something is affirmed (or denied) regarding all objects of a given group, a given class, for example: “All fish breathe with gills.” In private judgments, affirmation or negation no longer applies to all, but only to some subjects, for example: “Some students are excellent students”; in single judgments - to only one, for example: “This student did not learn the lesson well.”

Judgments are formed in two main ways: 1) directly, when they express what is perceived; 2) indirectly - through inferences or reasoning. In the first case, we see, for example, a brown table and make the simplest judgment: “This table is brown.” In the second case, with the help of reasoning, one deduces from some judgments and obtains other (or other) judgments. For example, D.I. Mendeleev, on the basis of the periodic law he discovered, purely theoretically, only with the help of inferences, deduced and predicted some properties of chemical elements still unknown in his time.

In such work of thought, which produces inferences and consists in reasoning (and, in frequency, predictions), its indirect nature is most clearly manifested. Inference, reasoning - this is the main form of indirect knowledge of reality. For example, if it is known that “all shale is flammable” (first proposition) and that “this substance is oil shale” (second proposition), then one can immediately infer, i.e., conclude that “this substance is flammable” (the third proposition is derived of the first two). Moreover, it is no longer necessary to specifically resort to direct experimental verification of this conclusion. Consequently, an inference is a connection between thoughts (concepts, judgments), as a result of which from one or more judgments we obtain another judgment, extracting it from the content of the original judgments.

The initial judgments from which another judgment is derived are called premises of the inference.

Based on such methods and formulas of reasoning, one can compare with each other certain concepts and judgments that a person uses in the course of his mental activity. As this comparison proceeds, all the main thoughts that arise in the process of thinking about the gradually solved problem are checked. The truth and correctness of every thought then becomes strictly substantiated and demonstrative. Essentially, the entire process of proof (for example, a mathematical theorem) is ultimately built as a chain of syllogisms that correlate various judgments, concepts, etc. with each other.

Thus, syllogism and all other logical forms are absolutely necessary for the normal course of mental activity. Thanks to them, any thinking becomes demonstrative, convincing, consistent and, therefore, correctly reflects objective reality. Therefore, formal logic, which specifically studies such forms of thinking as concept, judgment and inference, thereby studies very significant patterns of mental activity.

The patterns studied by formal logic, although necessary, are completely insufficient for a complete, deep, comprehensive explanation of human thinking.

The subject of formal logic is not all thinking, but only one side of it, although, as we have seen, it is very significant (logical forms of thinking). Formal logic examines, as it were, ready-made, existing, already arisen thoughts - concepts, judgments, etc. - and establishes certain relationships (formulas) between them. A syllogism is one example of such a relationship or such a formula.

The formula of a syllogism, like any other formula of formal logic, does not express the process of thinking, does not indicate how exactly the process of emergence and development of a given thought proceeds. For example, in a syllogism, the largest, i.e., general premise usually appears first, then the smaller, i.e., particular premise follows, and only then is a conclusion drawn from both premises. But this does not mean, of course, that in a living, actual, real process of thinking, first only a general position (general judgment) appears and only then does some particular judgment arise. The general and the particular are always inextricably interconnected. Moreover, in real thinking, the premise of a syllogism or any other conclusion is never given immediately in a ready-made form. They must be identified, extracted, isolated with the help of thinking.

Formal logic is thus distracted and abstracted from the immediate conditions of the emergence and development of certain thoughts. It is completely distracted, in particular, from the relationship of thinking with sensory knowledge. In other words, it does not explore at all, unlike psychology, how exactly the content of our thinking arises and is enriched on the basis of sensations, perceptions and ideas. In logical formulas, for example in a syllogism, already frozen, complete, completely clearly and completely formulated thoughts, i.e., results, are correlated with each other. finished products thinking.

But there is another, no less significant side of mental activity - the thought process itself, in the course and result of which this or that person produces results, products of thought in the form of concepts, judgments, etc. This is the second, also very important side of thinking is no longer studied by formal logic, but by psychology. For each individual, when he thinks (i.e. during training and assimilation of knowledge, during work activity, in the process of communicating with other people, while thinking about some task or reading a book, in the process of artistic and scientific creativity), new thoughts, guesses, assumptions, ideas, plans arise and develop.

Psychology studies the process of thinking of an individual, that is, it studies how and why this or that thought arises and develops.

Thus, the subject of logic is the relationship between cognitive results, products that arise in the process of thinking; psychology studies the patterns of the thought process that lead to cognitive results that satisfy the requirements of logic. Both logic and psychology study the same cognitive activity, but from different sides, in different qualities: logic primarily from the side of results (products of thinking - concepts, judgments, conclusions), and psychology - from the side of the process. Since the process of thinking and its results are inextricably interconnected and do not exist without each other, psychology and logic are closely related and complement each other in the study of thinking.

Thinking as a process

To psychologically study thinking as a process means to study the internal, hidden reasons leading to the formation of certain cognitive results. Such results, products of thinking, are, for example, the following facts: a given student solved or did not solve the problem; whether or not he has an idea, a solution plan, a guess; whether or not he has acquired certain knowledge, methods of action; whether he has formed a new concept, etc. Behind all these externally appearing facts, psychology strives to reveal the internal thought process that leads to them. Thus, she explores internal, specific reasons that make it possible to explain, and not just state and describe externally occurring mental phenomena and events. Psychological science proceeds from the principle of determinism (the principle of causality): external causes act through internal conditions.

Analysis and synthesis

The thinking process is, first of all, analysis, synthesis and generalization. Analysis is the selection of certain aspects, elements, properties, connections, relationships, etc. in an object; This is the division of a cognizable object into various components. For example, a schoolboy in a circle class young technicians, trying to understand the method of operation of a mechanism or machine, first of all, identifies various elements or machines, first of all, identifies various elements, parts of this mechanism and disassembles it into separate parts. So - in the simplest case - he analyzes and dismembers the cognizable object.

During the analysis of any object, its properties that are the most important, significant, significant, interesting, turn out to be especially strong irritants and therefore come to the fore. Such stimuli cause an active process of excitation (primarily in the cerebral cortex) and, according to the physiological law of induction, inhibit the differentiation of other properties of the same object, which are weak stimuli. Thus, the physiological basis of the mental process of analysis will be a certain ratio of excitation and inhibition in the higher parts of the brain.

Unlike analysis, synthesis involves combining elements into a single whole.

Analysis and synthesis are always interconnected. The inextricable unity between them clearly appears already in the cognitive process of comparison. At the initial stages of familiarization with the world around us, various objects are learned primarily through comparison. Any comparison of two or more objects begins with a comparison or correlation of them with each other, that is, it begins with synthesis. During this synthetic act, an analysis of the compared phenomena, objects, events, etc. occurs - the identification of what is common and different in them. For example, a child compares different representatives class of mammals and, with the help of the teacher, gradually identifies the most general signs these animals. So comparison leads to generalization.

In the course of generalization, something common stands out in the compared objects - as a result of their analysis. These properties common to different objects are of two types: 1) common as similar features and 2) common as essential features. For example, you can find something similar between the most dissimilar objects; in particular, cherry, peony, blood, raw meat, boiled crayfish, etc. can be combined into one group, into one class of color commonality. However, this similarity (commonality) between them does not in any way express the truly essential properties of the listed items. In this case, the similarity is based on their purely external, only very superficial, insignificant characteristics. Generalizations that are made as a result of such a superficial, shallow analysis of objects are of little value and, moreover, constantly lead to errors. A generalization based on a superficial analysis of purely external properties, for example, of a whale, leads to the deeply erroneous conclusion that a whale is not a mammal, but a fish. In this case, a comparison of these objects identifies among their common features only similar but insignificant ones (appearance, fish-like body shape). And vice versa, when, as a result of the analysis, general properties as significant, it becomes clear that the whale is not a fish, but a mammal. Consequently, every essential property is at the same time common to a given group of homogeneous objects, but not vice versa: not every common (similar) property is essential to a given group of objects. Common essential features are identified during and as a result of in-depth analysis and synthesis.

The laws of analysis, synthesis and generalization are the main internal, specific laws of thinking. Only on their basis can all external manifestations of mental activity be explained. Thus, a teacher often observes that a student who has solved a problem or learned a theorem cannot carry out a transfer, i.e., use this solution in other conditions, cannot apply the theorem to solve problems of the same type if their content, drawing, etc. Somewhat modified.

Often described and practically very important facts of this kind require a psychological explanation. One of the reasons for the transfer or non-transfer of knowledge from a given situation to another is, first of all, the variation (change) of conditions when presenting a task. If you significantly vary the conditions of problems whose solution is based on the same theorem, then the solution will be transferred from one problem to another. Conversely, without such variation, transfer is impossible. It appears that transfer depends directly on variation. However, this is still an insufficient, very superficial and non-psychological explanation of an externally observable fact (transfer).

In fact, varying the conditions (drawing, etc.) in which the student is presented with a task is not the action of the student, but only of the teacher. To connect transfer directly with variation means to directly correlate the external, pedagogical influence (the teacher’s variation of the conditions of the task) only with the result of the students’ mental activity, that is, with the external factor of transfer or non-transfer. Nothing can be said here about the student’s thinking process itself, about the internal, specific laws of his mental activity leading to this result. How the internal conditions of his thinking mediate the external, pedagogical influence remains unknown. Then it is impossible to purposefully educate a child, it is impossible to shape his thinking.

In fact, varying the conditions of the task psychologically means that favorable preconditions have been created for the student’s mental activity. Varying the conditions helps the student analyze the task proposed to him, highlight the most essential components in it and generalize them. As he identifies and generalizes the essential conditions of different problems, he transfers the solution from one problem to another, which is essentially similar to the first. Thus, behind the external dependence “variation - transfer” there is a psychologically revealed, internal dependence “analysis - generalization”. The externally observed result (transfer) turns out to be a natural consequence of the student’s internal thinking process. In order to transfer a solution from one problem to another, it is necessary to reveal what is essentially common between them. The revelation of this general principle of solution as a result of the analysis of both tasks is the internal, psychological level of transfer.

Motivation thinking

Analysis and synthesis, in general, mental activity, like any other activity, is always caused by some needs of the individual. If there are no needs, there is no activity that they could cause.

Studying thinking, like any other mental process, psychological science takes into account and, to one degree or another, specifically examines what specific needs and motives forced this person engage in cognitive activity and under what specific circumstances did he have a need for analysis, synthesis, etc. (in contrast to psychology, formal logic abstracts not only from the relationship of thinking with sensory cognition, but also from the relationship of mental activity with needs, motives, emotions ). What thinks, thinks, is not “pure” thinking itself, not the thought process itself as such, but a person, an individual, a personality with certain abilities, feelings and needs. The inextricable connection of mental activity with needs clearly reveals the most important fact that any thinking is always the thinking of the individual in all the richness of his relationships with nature, society, and other people.

The motives of thinking studied in psychology are of two types: 1) specifically cognitive and 2) nonspecific. In the first case, the incentives and driving forces mental activity is served by interests and motives in which they manifest themselves cognitive needs(curiosity, etc.). In the second case, thinking begins under the influence of more or less external causes, and not purely cognitive interests. For example, a schoolchild may begin to prepare homework, solve a problem, think about it not out of a desire to learn and discover something new, but only because he is afraid of falling behind his friends, etc. But whatever the initial motivation thinking, as it is implemented, cognitive motives themselves begin to operate. It often happens that a student sits down to study lessons only under the compulsion of adults, but in the process of educational work he also develops purely cognitive interests in what he does, reads, and decides.

Thus, a person begins to think under the influence of certain needs, and in the course of his mental activity, increasingly deeper and stronger cognitive needs arise and develop.

Thinking and problem solving

Problem situation and task

Thinking is purposeful. The need for thinking arises, first of all, when, in the course of life and practice, a new goal, a new problem, new circumstances and conditions of activity appear before a person. For example, this happens when a doctor is faced with some new, still unknown disease and tries to find and use new methods of treating it. By its very essence, thinking is necessary only in those situations in which these goals arise, and the old, previous means and methods of activity are insufficient (although necessary) to achieve them. Such situations are called problematic. With the help of mental activity, originating in a problem situation, it is possible to create, discover, find, and invent new ways and means of achieving goals and satisfying needs.

Thinking is the search and discovery of something new. In those cases where you can get by with old, already known methods of action, previous knowledge and skills, a problem situation does not arise and therefore thinking is simply not required. For example, a second grade student is not forced to think by a question like: “How much is 2x2?” To answer such questions, only the old knowledge that this child already has is quite sufficient; thinking is unnecessary here. The need for mental activity also disappears in cases where the student has mastered a new way of solving certain problems or examples, but is forced again and again to solve similar problems and examples that have already become known to him. Consequently, not every situation in life is problematic, that is, challenging thinking.

It is necessary to distinguish between a problem situation and a task. A problematic situation is a rather vague, not yet very clear and little-conscious impression, as if signaling “something is wrong,” “something is not right.” For example, the pilot begins to notice that something incomprehensible is happening to the engine, but he has not yet figured out what exactly is happening, in what part of the engine, for what reason, and even more so the pilot still does not know what actions need to be taken to avoid possible danger. It is in these kinds of problematic situations that thinking begins. As a result of its analysis, a task or problem in the corresponding sense of the word arises and is formulated.

The emergence of a task - in contrast to a problem situation - means that it has now been possible to at least preliminary and approximately separate the given (known) and the unknown (sought). This division appears in the verbal formulation of the problem. For example, in an educational problem, its initial conditions (what is given, what is known) and the requirement, the question (what needs to be proved, found, determined, calculated) are more or less clearly fixed. Thus, in the order of only a first approximation and quite preliminary, the desired (unknown) is outlined ), searching for and finding which results in solving the problem. Consequently, the original initial formulation of the problem only to the very minimum extent and very approximately determines what is being sought. As the problem is solved, i.e., as more and more new and more essential conditions and requirements are identified, what is being sought is increasingly determined. Its characteristics are becoming more meaningful and clear. The final solution to the problem means that what is being sought is identified, found, and fully defined. If the unknown were completely and completely defined already in the initial formulation of its initial conditions and requirements, then there would be no need to look for it. It would immediately be known, that is, no problem would arise that requires thinking to solve it. And vice versa, if there were no initial formulation of the problem, outlining in which area the unknown should be sought, then the latter would be impossible to find. There would be no preliminary data, clues or outlines for his search. Problem situation (in folk tales: “Go there, I don’t know where, find something, I don’t know what”) would not give rise to anything other than a painful feeling of bewilderment and confusion.

Determination of thinking as a process

In the course of solving a problem, thinking as a process emerges especially clearly. The interpretation of thinking as a process means, first of all, that the very determination of mental activity is also carried out as a process. In other words, in the course of solving a problem, a person identifies more and more new, previously unknown to him, conditions and requirements of the task, which causally determine the further course of thinking. Consequently, the determination of thinking is not given initially as something absolutely ready-made and already completed; it is precisely formed, gradually formed and developed in the course of solving a problem, that is, it appears in the form of a process. In the initial conditions, the course of the process of mental activity is not completely programmed; as the problem is solved, new conditions for its implementation continuously arise and develop. Since it is impossible to program everything completely in advance, as the thought process progresses, constant corrections and clarifications are necessary (as a response to new conditions that cannot initially be anticipated).

Finding a solution to a problem is often described as a sudden, unexpected, instant discovery, insight, etc. This fact also means a guess, heuristic, etc. This is how the result, the product of thinking, is recorded, but the task of psychology is to reveal the thought process leading to the result . In order to reveal the causality of this seemingly sudden insight, i.e., the instantaneous finding of the unknown (the sought-after), we must first of all take into account that in the course of solving the problem, at least a minimal, very insignificant and initially very approximate mental anticipation of the unknown is always carried out. Thanks to such anticipation, it is possible to build a bridge from the known to the unknown.

In order to better understand the basic mechanisms of the thought process, consider the following three mutually opposing points of view on the mental anticipation of the unknown, which are expressed in psychology. Depending on different views on the thinking process, psychologists offer different ways to shape students’ thinking while solving problems.

The first point of view is based on the fact that each previous stage (“step”) of the cognitive process gives rise to the immediately following one. This thesis is correct, but insufficient. In fact, in the course of thinking, at least a minimal anticipation of what is being sought is carried out more than one “step” forward. Therefore, everything cannot be reduced only to the relationship between the previous and immediately following stages. In other words, one should not underestimate or downplay the degree and volume of mental anticipation in the course of solving a problem.

The second, opposite point of view, on the contrary, exaggerates, absolutizes, overestimates the moment of anticipation of a still unknown decision, that is, a result (product) that has not yet been identified and has not yet been achieved in the course of thinking. Anticipation - always only partial and approximate - immediately turns here into a ready and complete definition of such a result (decision). The fallacy of this point of view can be demonstrated by the following example. The student is looking for a solution to a difficult problem, which he, naturally, does not yet know; he can find it only at the end, as a result, at the end of the thought process. The teacher, who already knows the solution, begins to help the student. An experienced teacher will never prompt the entire course of the solution at once; he will give the student gradually and as needed only small hints, so that the main part of the work is done by the student himself. This is the only way to form and develop students’ independent thinking. If you immediately suggest the main path to a solution, communicate the future result and thus “help” the student, then this will only slow down the development of his mental activity. When the student knows in advance the entire course of the solution from the first to last stage, his thinking either does not work at all, or works to a minimal extent, very passively. Students always need qualified help from a teacher, but this help should not replace the student’s thinking process with a pre-given, ready-made result.

So, both of these considered points of view recognize the presence of mental anticipation in the process of searching for the unknown, although the first of them underestimates, and the second exaggerates, the role of such anticipation. The third point of view, on the contrary, completely denies anticipation in the course of solving a problem.

The third point of view has become very widespread in connection with the development of the cybernetic approach to thinking. It consists of the following: in the course of the thought process, one must go through in a row (remember, take into account, try to use) one after another all, many or some features of the corresponding object, general provisions associated with it, theorems, solution options, etc. and as a result select from them only what is necessary for the solution. For example, if the initial conditions of the problem indicate a parallelogram, then in the process of thinking about it you need to remember, go through all the properties of this object in a row and try to use each of its properties in turn to solve it. In the end, one of them may turn out to be suitable for this case.

In fact, as special psychological experiments have shown, thinking never works in such a blind, random, mechanical search of all or some possible solution options. In the course of thinking, it is anticipated, at least to a minimal extent, which specific feature of the object under consideration will be isolated, analyzed and generalized. Not just any, no matter what, but only a certain property of the object comes to the fore and is used for the solution. The remaining properties are simply not noticed and disappear from sight. This manifests direction, selectivity, and determinism of thinking. Consequently, even the minimal, most approximate and very preliminary anticipation of the unknown in the process of searching for it makes a blind, mechanical search of all or many properties of the object under consideration unnecessary.

That is why it is important to find out how, in the course of cognitive activity, a person mentally anticipates the unknown. This is one of central problems psychology of thinking. In the process of its development, psychological science overcomes the three erroneous points of view discussed regarding the mental superiority of the unknown. Solving this problem means revealing the basic mechanism of thinking.

The unknown (the sought-after) is not some kind of “absolute emptiness” with which it is generally impossible to operate. It is always, in one way or another, connected with something known, given. In any problem, as already noted, something is always known (initial conditions and requirements, the question of the problem). Based on the connections and relationships between the known and the unknown, it becomes possible to seek and find something new, previously hidden, unknown. For example, to determine the unknown properties of a given chemical element, it is necessary to ensure that it interacts and interacts with at least some already known chemical reagents. It is in these relationships with them that he will reveal and make his real properties cognizable. Any object reveals its inherent signs, properties, qualities, etc. in its relationships with other objects, things, processes. The discovery and cognition of something new in an object (subject) would be impossible without including it in new connections with other objects (subjects). Consequently, to understand an object in its new, as yet unknown properties, one must go, first of all, through knowledge of those relationships and interconnections in which these properties are manifested.

Therefore, the most important mechanism of the thought process is as follows. In the process of thinking, an object is included in more and more new connections and, thanks to this, appears in more and more of its properties and qualities, which are fixed in new concepts; Thus, all new content is drawn out of the object; it seems to turn every time with its other side, new properties are revealed in it.

This mechanism of thinking is called analysis through synthesis, since the isolation (analysis) of new properties in an object is accomplished through the correlation (synthesis) of the object under study with other objects, that is, through its inclusion in new connections with other objects. Only as people reveal the system of connections and relationships in which the analyzed object is located, do they begin to notice, discover and analyze new, still unknown signs of this object. And vice versa, until a person begins to reveal the system of such connections himself, he will not pay any attention to a new property that is necessary for the solution, even if this property is suggested by direct indication.

A random hint often contributes to discoveries and inventions. However, the use of such a hint reveals the above-mentioned pattern of the thought process. A “happy” chance will be noticed and used only by the person who thinks hard about the problem being solved. The whole point is how prepared the soil is, in general the system of internal conditions, which receives this or that hint from the outside. Here, as elsewhere, external causes act only through internal conditions.

Special experiments have revealed a number of psychological, internal conditions for the use of such hints. The experiments were carried out as follows. In the first case, the experimenter offered the subject the same hint at different (early and late) stages of solving the problem; in the second case, on the contrary, at the same stage of the thought process, hints were offered different levels(some contained more or fewer parts of solving the problem). At the same time, as a hint for solving the main experimental problem, a second, additional, auxiliary, less difficult problem was given, containing the principle for solving the first one. The subject could generalize this solution principle and transfer it from one problem to another.

From experience it is clear that generalization and its result (transfer) depend, first of all, on the inclusion of both tasks in a single process of analytical-synthetic activity. The very course of generalization (and transfer) is determined by at what stages of analysis - early or late - the correlation between the task and the hint is made.

The result of the process (transfer, use of hints) depends on the work carried out by the subject himself in analyzing the task. Only when a person himself comes close to the suggested part of the decision is he able to accept help from the outside (teacher, leader). Otherwise, the solver simply will not understand the hint and therefore will not accept it, or it will be used purely formally, mechanically, without understanding the essence of the matter; Instead of developing thinking, coaching will take place. The student can only be truly helped by a hint that is naturally included and fits into the appropriate system of connections and relationships, which by this point has already been sufficiently analyzed by the student himself. Then the hint is included in his thinking as a partial answer to a question that he has already posed to himself and is thinking about intensely. If it is thus accepted by the student and used by him for the further process of solving the problem, then there is objective reliable evidence that the student’s thinking has reached more high level. And vice versa, rejection of the same hint and inability to use it means that the thought process is still at a lower level. Thus, the accepted or ignored hint becomes an objective indicator of the thinking process. By how a student accepts outside help, one can judge the progress of the mental process of thinking. The experimental method of prompting allows for psychological research into the internal specific patterns of mental activity.

Thinking while solving problems

As already noted, mental activity is necessary not only for solving already set, formulated problems (for example, school-type ones). It is also necessary for the formulation of the problem itself, for identifying and understanding new problems. Often, finding and posing a problem requires even more mental effort than its subsequent resolution. Thinking is also necessary for the assimilation of knowledge, for understanding the text during reading and in many other cases, which are by no means identical to solving problems.

Although thinking is not limited to solving problems (problems), it is best to form it in the course of solving them, when the student comes across problems and questions that are feasible for him and formulates them. Recently, based on psychological studies of problem situations and problem solving, methods for problem-based teaching of schoolchildren have been developed. These teaching methods are aimed at putting the student in the position of a discoverer, an explorer of some problems that are feasible for him. For example, a student solves a series of problems and, as a result, discovers a new theorem for himself (of course, not for humanity), which underlies the solution of all these problems. Psychological science comes to the conclusion that it is not necessary to eliminate all difficulties from the student’s path. Only in the course of overcoming them will he be able to form his mental abilities. Help and guidance from the teacher do not consist in eliminating these difficulties, but in preparing the student to overcome them.

Types of thinking

In psychology, the following simplest and somewhat conventional classification of types of thinking is common: 1) visual-effective, 2) visual-figurative and) abstract (theoretical) thinking.

Visual-effective thinking

In the course of historical development, people solved the problems facing them first in terms of practical activity, only then did theoretical activity emerge from it. For example, at first our distant ancestor learned to measure plots of land practically (in steps, etc.), and only then, based on the knowledge accumulated in the course of this practical activity, geometry gradually emerged and developed as a special theoretical science. Practical and theoretical activities are inextricably interconnected.

Only as practical activity develops does it stand out as a relatively independent mental activity.

Not only in the historical development of mankind, but also in the process mental development For each child, the starting point will be not purely theoretical, but practical activity. It is within this latter that children's thinking first develops. In preschool age (before three years inclusive) thinking is mainly visual and effective. The child analyzes and synthesizes cognizable objects as he, with his hands, practically separates, dismembers and reunites certain objects perceived at the moment. Curious children often break their toys precisely in order to find out “what’s inside.”

Visual-figurative thinking

IN simplest form Visual-figurative thinking occurs mainly in preschool children, i.e., at the age of three to seven years. Although the connection between thinking and practical actions is preserved, it is not as close, direct and immediate as before. During the analysis and synthesis of a cognizable object, a child does not necessarily and does not always have to touch the object that interests him with his hands. In many cases, systematic practical manipulation (action) with an object is not required, but in all cases it is necessary to clearly perceive and visualize this object. In other words, preschoolers think only in visual images and do not yet master concepts (in the strict sense).

The fact is that children’s visual-figurative thinking is still directly and completely subordinated to their perception, and therefore they cannot yet distract themselves, abstract with the help of concepts from some of the most striking properties of the object in question.

Similar documents

The emergence, formation and course of the thinking process. Psychological nature of the thought process. Basic operations and phases as aspects of mental activity. Review and description of various types of thinking, its levels, individual characteristics.

course work, added 06/28/2009


Concept and characteristic features thinking, its study in modern psychological science. “Paired” classification of thinking, varieties and their relationship with each other. Distinctive features of thinking and perception. The positive value of autism.

report, added 02/24/2010


The concept of operations and types of thinking. The totality of human mental activity: cognitive, emotional and volitional. Thinking as a type of cognition, the relationship of thinking with intelligence, creativity and speech. Connections between mental phenomena.

test, added 03/14/2014


The essence of thinking as a psychological process. Phases of the thought process. Types of thinking and their features. Subject-effective, visual-figurative, verbal-logical thinking. Individual characteristics in thinking. Theories of individual differences.

course work, added 02/16/2011


Awareness of a problem situation is the beginning of mental work. Determination of the driving strategy of the solution, basic mental operations. Types of thinking and features of their manifestation in human mental activity. Solving complex heuristic problems.

test, added 06/04/2009


Thinking is an active process of reflecting the objective world in the human brain in the form of judgments, concepts, and conclusions. The essence of thinking as a cognitive process, its types and types. Individual characteristics of thinking. Speech as a tool of thinking.

abstract, added 12/10/2010


Evolutionary foundations for the formation of thinking. Evolutionary biological aspect in the study of the brain. Features of higher nervous activity person. The relationship between language and thinking. Psychological foundations of thought processes (logical thinking).

abstract, added 03/29/2011


The essence of positive thinking in a problem situation and the technique of mastering it. Problems of the essence, types and mechanisms of thinking, possibilities of its development in psychological literature. Ways to constructively accept criticism, its importance for improvement.

test, added 03/13/2016


Thinking as the highest cognitive mental process. Stages of formation and conditional classification of types of thinking adopted in modern psychology. Features of the development of visual-effective and visual-figurative thinking in primary schoolchildren.

course work, added 12/29/2010


General characteristics of thinking processes. Types of thinking. Logical operations of the thinking process. Individual differences and thinking styles. Activation of thinking processes in educational activities.

Autonomous region and autonomous district, their legal entities. nature as national-state subjects of the Russian Federation.

Addictive behavior is one of the most common deviations.

Alcoholism and drug addiction as a medical and social problem

Thinking is closely related to speech, which is the instrument of our mental activity. When a person thinks, he seems to pronounce his thought.

Sometimes this is done in the form of expanded phrases pronounced to oneself, but more often the thought is formalized in words and sentences in an abbreviated, collapsed form, so that we do not always notice this internal pronunciation.

Human mental activity has social character. In the process of their historical development, in the process of making tools and in the course of their use, people felt the need to share their thoughts with each other, and in this communication the ability to think and speak was developed.

The development of the second signaling system, and therefore thinking, occurred and is occurring in the conditions of human social life. Thanks to speech, the continuity of the products of thinking and their communication to subsequent generations became possible.

Without the transfer of this experience (especially in the form of printed works), human thought could not have created science, technology and culture.

Consolidating the results of thinking in oral and written speech makes it possible to successfully teach children, transferring previously acquired knowledge to them in a ready-made form and encouraging them to engage in independent mental activity.

Knowledge of objective reality begins with sensation and perception. Thinking is based on sensory knowledge and goes far beyond it. That is, a person is able to reflect features of the surrounding world that are inaccessible to direct perception. Thinking is a socially conditioned process, inextricably linked with speech, a process of generalized and indirect reflection of reality in its connections and relationships between cognizable objects.

The transition from sensory cognition to thinking is carried out with the help of words (i.e. with the participation of the second signaling system). Through words, people generalize the characteristics of objects, identify significant ones, record and store information, and transmit it to other people. That is, the material basis of thinking is speech. The deeper and more thoroughly thought out this or that thought, the more clearly and clearly it is expressed in words, in oral and written speech. And on the contrary, the more the verbal formulation of a thought is improved and honed, the clearer and more understandable the thought itself becomes.

The inextricable connection between thinking and language clearly reveals the social, socio-historical essence of human thinking. Cognition presupposes the continuity of all connections acquired in the course of human history. From society a person receives the entire amount of knowledge that humanity acquired before him. All this happens due to the fact that a person can not only record, but also transmit knowledge using language.

The social nature of thinking is also revealed in the fact that it is in society that needs or the need to understand, learn, or explain something arise. It is in society, in the process of practical activity, public or personal life, that a person encounters the unexpected, the unfamiliar, problems and tasks. And the social nature of thinking is revealed in what tasks and in what direction a person will solve.

Thus, human thinking arises in society, develops and improves in it, and outside society it is impossible.

What is thinking? What are its differences from other ways of human knowledge of reality?

First of all, thinking is the highest cognitive process. It represents the generation of new knowledge, an active form of creative reflection and transformation of reality by man. Thinking generates a result that does not exist either in reality itself or in the subject at a given moment in time. Thinking (in elementary forms it is also present in animals) can also be understood as the acquisition of new knowledge, the creative transformation of existing ideas.

The difference between thinking and others psychological processes also lies in the fact that it is almost always associated with the presence of a problem situation, a task that needs to be solved, and an active change in the conditions in which this task is given. Thinking, unlike perception, goes beyond the limits of the sensory data and expands the boundaries of knowledge. In thinking based on sensory information, certain theoretical and practical conclusions are made. It reflects existence not only in the form of individual things, phenomena and their properties, but also determines the connections that exist between them, which most often are not given directly to man in his very perception. The properties of things and phenomena, the connections between them are reflected in thinking in a generalized form, in the form of laws and entities.

In practice, thinking as a separate mental process does not exist; it is invisibly present in all other cognitive processes: perception, attention, imagination, memory, speech. The highest forms of these processes are necessarily associated with thinking, and the degree of its participation in these cognitive processes determines their level of development.

Thinking is the movement of ideas that reveals the essence of things. Its result is not an image, but some thought, an idea. A specific result of thinking can be a concept - a generalized reflection of a class of objects in their most general and essential features.

Thinking is a special kind of theoretical and practical activity that involves a system of actions and operations included in it of an indicative, research, transformative and cognitive nature.

The highest level of knowledge of the world is thinking. Without it, it is impossible to get an idea of ​​objects, features, and interconnections of reality that are inaccessible to us on a sensory level. Forms of thinking are varied. It is the object of research in many sciences, especially logic, psychology, and neurophysiology.

Thinking process

Thinking is a special process that has a number of characteristics. The mechanism and operations of the thought process are considered separately.

• Generalization. Thinking reflects the surrounding reality in a generalized form. A person applies generalizations to individual objects and phenomena.
• Another sign of thinking - indirect knowledge of the surrounding world, that is, a person is able to characterize and judge objects without direct contact, using information analysis.

Rational and intuitive thinking

Rational are the types and forms of thinking that clearly follow logical connections and leading to a specific goal without taking into account the sensory sphere. The sphere of desires, impulses, premonitions, experiences and impressions is discarded. If a difficult situation plunges a person into a storm of emotions, he can pull himself together thanks to a rational way of thinking. Rational thinking provides only clear and impartial characteristics of an object from any sphere. There are no personal emotions in rational thinking, but it is not always productive. There are such forms of rational thinking as concept, judgment, inference.

Irrational thinking, on the contrary, occurs in the absence of logic, goals and relationships. An intuitive view of the situation is the basis of imaginative thinking. It does not involve the use of analysis. Intuitive types and forms of thinking do not require verbal expression. Language, albeit mentally, is necessary in the rational sphere, based on a verbal-conceptual basis. The result of intuitive thinking depends on the investment of personal and semantic content in the image, which is necessary for creative people who create works of art.

Understanding between people occurs simply when they operate with rational concepts, because their essence is precisely defined. It is quite difficult to convey your feelings and feelings to your interlocutor. Feelings expressed through speech will no longer be perceived in the same way by the listener. Regarding misunderstanding in communication, Tyutchev aptly noted: “A thought expressed is a lie.”

Forms of implementation of thought processes

For better understanding we have grouped all the forms into the table below

Criteria	Characteristic
Conceptual form	The concept as a form of thinking contributes to knowledge of the essence of an existing object (subject, phenomenon), identification of subject relationships, definition of relationships, generalization of features. The properties of each object or phenomenon are varied, they can be essential and insignificant. The concept as a form of thinking exists in verbal form. Words denote concepts of an individual (“planet”, “edge”), general (“term”, “element”), concrete or abstract (“evil” and “good”) nature. A large volume of features is a property of generic concepts (“animal”, “furniture”), while specific concepts (“primate”, “sofa”) have a smaller number of features.
Form of judgments	Judgment as a form of thinking contains confirmation/non-confirmation of any fact, position of an object, connection with phenomena, properties, events. It can be contestable, general or individual. To express judgments, it is necessary to use full-fledged phrases. Judgment as a form of thinking is identical to a proposal. All phrases from interjections and some of several words (“Ah!”, “Well, what else?”) are not considered judgments.
Form of inference	Inference as a form of thinking arises when several judgments are combined. Inferences are divided into inductive and deductive. The induction method involves generalization, the unification of individual elements. With its help, patterns and rules are identified in the study of various phenomena. The deduction method involves a train of thought from the overall picture to individual details and facts. This is the acquisition of knowledge based on existing patterns.

A person implements the above forms of thinking in all their forms, taking into account the tasks being solved.

Judgment

Judgment is a form of thought that establishes logical relationships between concepts, the coincidence of which (identity) is expressed by the connective “is”, the contradiction - “is not”. Interrelation or non-identity is expressed in the form of sentences, for example, as Whatley said: “Logic is the science of language.” Sentences are only verbal shells of judgments, but they cannot be the same thing. For example, logical forms of thinking cannot be reflected in interrogative and imperative sentences. Any judgments can be expressed in the form of sentences, but not all phrases are judgments. True judgments really reflect the essence and characteristics of the object, while false ones do not adequately reflect them.

Inference as a form of thinking

Inference allows you to obtain “fresh” knowledge based on available information. It is formed as a result of the transition from any statements about real world to a new conclusion, which is new knowledge about the situation. For example, the coincidence of the geometric center and the center of gravity of a body is possible when its density coincides in all its parts. Astronomical observations have shown that these centers near the Earth do not coincide. The conclusion follows: The Earth has different densities in its different parts. In this way, you can gain new knowledge without examining the object.

Thinking processes

Working on a variety of tasks and situations (in theory, in practice) is impossible without using the following processes in various combinations.

Analysis	Mental process: an object (phenomenon, situation) is mentally divided into its component parts. Accompanied by the separation of non-essential connections.
Synthesis	Restoring the whole from disparate elements is the reverse process of analysis. The predominance of analysis or synthesis in the way of thinking depends on the individual’s propensity for different mental forms.
Comparison	To compare objects (concepts, things) means to compare them, to see what is common and different in them, to classify (to unite according to one criterion).
Abstraction	A process in which an object is viewed from a certain angle: one feature (property, side) of the object is singled out and “abstracted” (not noticed), distracted from other features.
Specification	Operating with concrete phenomena, the opposite of abstraction
Generalization	Identifying the maximum number of similar features, features and connections between objects (things, concepts), discarding features that are isolated and random.

Scientific thinking

The thinking process can begin with the emergence of a problem situation and the need to solve it. The thought process is impossible without the ability to pose a question, to see the incomprehensible, the unknown.

Forms of scientific thinking are the formulation of a problem (question), determination of evidence or refutation of a fact, hypothesis and theory. The last two forms relate to anticipatory cognition and are necessary to stimulate scientific research, justification of the results.

Principles, laws and other categories are not considered forms of scientific thinking, since they are either concepts or judgments.

Types of thinking

Taking into account the problems that an individual solves, three directions of thinking are distinguished.

Visually effective	Perception of the environment and objects directly, associated with the implementation of real actions to transform objects. Forms of thinking used in activities that require practical analysis and combination (design, invention, chess game).
Visual-figurative	Based on figurative representations needed for mental resolution and transformation of situations. Its peculiarity is the appearance of unusual thoughts and combinations of objects, objects combined in an incredible way. Used by people whose profession is related to the presentation of objects, phenomena ( actor play or game on musical instruments, writing articles and books).
Verbal-logical	The basis is logical operations with concepts. Forms abstract thinking allow you to establish social or natural laws, work on scientific hypotheses and theories, and solve problems.

These types of thinking reflect the gradual development of intelligence. In adults, they are determined by individual characteristics associated with the type of activity and profession. Any types and forms of thinking are always interconnected.

Features of thinking

The main forms of thinking exist on the basis of psychological laws, taking into account the development of the mind and intelligence different people. What features determine the qualities of the mind?

• Flexibility- ability to adapt to a rapidly changing situation, change the course of action.
• Depth- the ability to penetrate into the essence of a complex problem, find its causes, see new tasks where others do not notice them.
• Speed- the ability to quickly apply basic forms of thinking, solve a situation, make a decision. It depends on the amount of knowledge, the development of thinking skills, and experience.
• Independence- the ability to set a new goal and achieve it without the participation of another individual. It is formed on the basis of information transmitted from surrounding people. A person who thinks independently can approach the study of the world from a creative point of view and find options for resolving the situation.
• Latitude- ability to cover a large number of topics and questions. It reflects the level of erudition, intelligence and versatility.
• Subsequence- the ability to follow logic, maintain logical continuity when expressing thoughts, and substantiate judgments.
• Criticality- the ability to learn not to be influenced by other people's thoughts. A critically thinking individual can soberly evaluate the strengths and weak sides, features of an object, phenomenon. He is prone to carefully checking his decisions and demandingly evaluating his thoughts.

The formation of all mental qualities occurs in a complex and always goes hand in hand with intellectual development. The level of ability to effectively solve situations and problems that get in the way is called intelligence. Improving important mental qualities and personality development in many directions depend on the good organization of educational and professional activities.

Practical exercises on the use of mental processes

No. 1. Comparison

Exercise: find common features in each pair of concepts and answer the question what forms of thinking were used in psychology. Several pairs refer to close “single-field” concepts (for example, “football” and “cue” indicate a sport or game), others refer to “multi-field” concepts from the point of view of semantics, the answers to which are not taken into account. Random or pure external signs are not counted. “Single-field” answers are compared with the correct results (10 to 15 matches are considered the norm).

No. 2. Reasoning

Exercise: Swahili is one of the African languages. Using several interlinear phrases, you need to translate the phrase “I love you” into Swahili.

During a group discussion, talk through the stages of solving the task and analyze step by step how you got the correct answer - “nikupenda”.

No. 3. Game “The King and Three Prisoners”

Group game for 10-13 people, several groups can participate. Each group will have to make a decision and discuss it in front of everyone when summing up the results. “The king has three prisoners. He invented a game to decide who should be executed and who should be pardoned. Blindfolded prisoners must draw lots (from 1 to 5), a piece of paper with a number is placed on each person's back. Two numbers are black, the rest are white. When all the pieces of paper were attached to their backs, the prisoners were placed in a row and their bandages were removed. The king promised that he would free the one who guessed the color of the number from his back. The prisoner standing at the end of the line saw the numbers of those in front, but was mistaken. The person standing second saw the number of the first and also did not give the correct answer. The first prisoner in the line did not see a single number and answered: “White.” The king released him for the correct answer.

Exercise: as the first prisoner reasoned, restore his train of thought (to solve the problem you need to think about why the other two prisoners made a mistake).