CC BY
23The path of logic in Ukraine: a history of concepts
Irina V. Khqmenkq
abstract. This paper traces the development of history of logic in Ukraine in the 19th century and early 20 th century. The author particularly discusses and compares the logical concepts of representatives of Kyiv philosophies, who made their contribution to the development of logic as a science and academic discipline. Some of them had sunk into oblivion for a long time and their names are still unknown in the logic community.
Keywords: logic, history of logic in Ukraine, Kyiv Theological Academy, St. Vladimir University of Kyiv
Nowadays one of the most important tasks for logic in Ukraine is to study the history of logical thought development. Since the research activities of logicians were always closely connected to their teaching activities it is expedient to consider history of logic as history of its teaching.
The teaching of logic in Ukraine has begun at the end of the 17th century. At that time higher educational institutions founded in Ukraine were influenced by Western Europe. The Ostroh Slavic Greek Latin Academy was the first institution of such type. It was established by Prince Konstiantyn-Vasyl Ostrozhsky and Princess Halshka Ostrozhska in 1576. The Zamojska Academy was opened later in 1594.
The quality of education offered by the academies at that time was very high. The undergraduate programs were based on the European educational standards including seven courses of 'free arts' divided into trivium (grammar, rhetoric, logic) and quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, astronomy). The greatest attention
was paid to trivium. Logical courses (also called dialectic) were based on the European universities' programs.
However, there were practically no students from Kyiv in these academies. Many sons of wealthy Cossack families studied abroad in prestigious universities of Western Europe. Only in the 17th century the first educational institution was opened in Kyiv. It was the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy, founded by Petro Mohyla, the Metropolitan of Kyiv, in 1615. The Academy has seen its golden ages from the end of the 17th century and till the beginning of the 18th century. With respect to teaching logic the Academy adopted methods and the curriculum of the Jesuit schools of Rzeczpospolita. The greatest philosophers of that period like Innocent Gizel (1600-1683), Stefan Iavorskyi (1658-1722) and Pheophan Prokopovich (1681-1736) gave logical lectures in the academy.
Unfortunately, after Moscow University was opened in 1755 the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy influence started rapidly to decline and in 1817 it was closed down. At the beginning of the 19th century the territory of the Left-Bank Ukraine witnessed opening of several educational institutions: in 1805 — Kharkov University, in 1817 — Richelieu Lyceum and a bit later — Novorossiysk Imperial University. One more institution — Lyceum of Higher Sciences was organized in Nizhyn.
At the same time after the Kyiv-Mohyla Academy was closed down the territory of the Right-Bank Ukraine was left with no higher educational institutions until 1819 when Kyiv Theological Academy (KTA) was founded. Educational institutions of such type were not numerous at that time. In the Russian Empire there were only four Theological Academies: in St. Petersburg (since 1809), in Moscow (since 1814), in Kyiv (since 1819) and in Kazan (since 1842).
It was planned to open the Theological Academy in Kyiv as far back as in 1816. However it wasn't opened because of lack of scholars. Therefore, instead of the KTA, the theological seminary had been functioning for two years. Its major task was to prepare students as well as teachers for the new educational institution.
Kyiv Theological Academy was ceremoniously opened on September, 28, 1819 and quickly became one of the centers of classical aca-
demic education in Ukraine. It had been functioning for about 100 years and was closed down in 1920.
At that time it was very difficult to enter the academy since the prospective students had to take special exam to be accepted and logic was one of them.
During the first few years of the Academy's functioning most students were Ukrainians but with a lapse of time the Sacred Synod suggested to start admitting seminary graduates from other ecclesiastical educational regions. As a result, Russians began to prevail among students of the Academy. The 1860s saw the increase of the number of foreign students — Serbians, Bulgarians, Greeks, Romanians and Syrians. Some of them became outstanding ecclesiastical and secular figures in their countries. Greek Catholics studied at the Academy as well.
The major task for all KTA students was to fundamentally study religion through in-depth mastering of the subjects included into the Academy's curriculum, in order to attain spiritual erudition. The full academic course lasted four years and was divided into lower and higher divisions. A weekly schedule of students' classes was the following: at the lower division — Holy Scripture (2 hours), Philosophy (10 hours), General Literature (6 hours), Civil History or Mathematics (selectively) (8 hours), Greek (4 hours), Hebrew (2 hours), one of modern languages German or French (2 hours). The higher division — Holy Scripture (2 hours), Theology (12 hours), Church Literature (6 hours), Church History (6 hours), Greek (4 hours), Hebrew (2 hours), one of modern languages (2 hours).
Logic was part of the Philosophy disciplines cycle. It was taught at the lower division during the first year of studies together with the History of Ancient Philosophy and Psychology. The second year of studies contained other subjects of the Philosophy cycle: History of Contemporary Philosophy, Metaphysics and Moral Philosophy.
During one hundred years of the KTA's functioning there were about two dozens of teachers majoring in Philosophy disciplines. Those who made their contribution to the development of logic as a science and academic discipline were also among them. For example, Ivan Skvortsov (1795-1863), Vasilii Karpov (1798-1867), Iosif Mikhnevich (1809-1885), Orest Novitskyi (1806-1884), Silvestr
Hogotskyi (1813-1889), Pamfil Yurkevich (1826-1874) and Piotr Li-nitskyi (1839-1906). Some of them taught logic not only in KTA but also in other high institution, particularly in St. Vladimir Imperial University of Kyiv.
Although Kyiv Theological Academy played a significant role in preparing graduates, it was still an ecclesiastical educational institution. Therefore opening of secular educational establishment in the Right-Bank Ukraine, where students could chose majors in different specialties became a significant problem. Only 15 years after KTA was opened the establishment of such type was founded in Kyiv.
On November 8, 1833, Emperor of the Russian Empire expressed his will to open a new university in Kyiv. On July 15, 1834, St. Vladimir University of Kyiv accepted its first 62 students. At that time there was only one faculty — the Faculty of Philosophy. In 1835 the Faculty of Law was opened and in 1841 Medical Faculty started to accept students. In a while the Faculty of Philosophy was divided in two separate departments and such structure of the University persisted up until 1917.
By statute of 1842 the Faculty of Philosophy comprised of the First Department (History and Philology) and the Second Department (Physics and Mathematics).
The Department of Philosophy was university-wide department. Professor Orest Novitskyi was appointed as Head of the Department on the recommendation of the KTA rector, Archbishop Innocent. He became the first professor, who gave logical lectures for students of Kyiv University.
In September of 1850 teaching of Philosophy was banned following the closing of all Departments of Philosophy in universities of Russian Empire. By the way, logic as an academic discipline had not suffered any limitations then. Teaching Philosophy in secular educational institutions was limited to Logic and Psychology till 'a special command'. However, these subjects could be taught solely by theology professors.
Moreover, the Sacred Synod instructed all theological academies to develop Logic curriculum for Russian universities, and the curriculum submitted by Moscow Theological Academy was accepted. University teachers were obliged to follow it as a model [1]. Mean-
while other theological academies, including KTA, continued teaching Philosophy, Logic and Psychology according to their own cur-riculums.
Starting in 1850 I. Skvortsov, who was an ordinary professor of Philosophy in KTA, Doctor of Theology, an Archpriest, started to give lectures on Logic at St. Vladimir University of Kyiv. The unique document proving this has been saved in archives — Skvort-sov's written consent to be appointed for the proposition by R. Tautffetter, rector of the university, to teach Logic and Psychology courses [2].
I. Skvortsov was teaching Logic until the end of 50s of the 19th century. Most probably, after him Logic course were passed to N. Favorov, an ordinary professor of Philosophy, Doctor of Theology, due to his position of professor of Theology, Logic and Psychology at St. Vladimir University of Kyiv at that time.
In 1876-1887 A. Kozlov held position of a privat-docent and later extraordinary, ordinary professor at the university. It is possible to find information in the list of philosophical subjects that he gave lectures on logic (theory of induction, theory of proof and theory of scientific system) for students of Historical-Philological Department in 1885-1886 [2] following the textbook on logic written by Ziegward.
At the end of 19th — the beginning of the 20th century curriculum subjects of Historical-Philological Department divided into compulsive and basic disciplines; compulsive and additional disciplines; compulsive and additional subjects, depending on the additional specialty. Logic was included into the block of compulsive and basic disciplines [3]. It was taught for three hours per week.
The archives contain preserved program that was used to teach students in 1911. To get a bigger picture on the course of Logic, which was followed at the university in the beginning of 20th century, we give it in full:
'Logic. Its definition and division. Historical explanation of the term.
The general essay on the development of logical doctrines.
Cognitive activity. Its elements and cognition.
Representation. Psychology formation and logical significance. Historical explanation of the term.
Notion. Psychology and Metaphysics of notion. The content and scope of the notion, its interrelation. Division of notion by content and scope. Historical essay on categories' doctrine.The basic logical rules on relations between the notions.
Definition and division. Their psychology. The basic logical rules. Fallacies in definition and division. Types of division. Historical essay on definition and division.
Judgement. Its psychological, grammatical, logical essence.
Logical laws and their formulas. Historical essay on these laws.
Argument. Its types. Psychological essence of judgement. Direct arguments. Historical essay on direct inferences.
Indirect arguments. Deduction and syllogistics. The basic axiom of syllogism. Its elements. Distinction between syllogisms by the character of premises.
Syllogistic figures and modus. The basic and special rules of syllogism. Conditional and dividing syllogisms. Aristotle's and Mill's doctrines on syllogism.
Induction. Methods of inductive generalization. Its basic axiom. Four inductive methods. Fallacies in induction. Analogy. Its types. Historical essay on analogy.
Hypothesis and proof. Its relation to inferences. Historical essay.
General information about system and methods of its construction. Analysis and synthesis. Historical essay [3]'.
In the late 19th century — early 20th century G. Chelpanov, P. Ti-homirov and V. Zenkovskyi took over teaching of Logic.
It is acknowledged that G. Chelpanov was giving lectures on Logic at the university starting from 1892 and till 1907. It can be supposed that after his departure to Moscow logical course was passed to P. Tihomirov, who was holding position of a privat-docent of the Department of Philosophy from 1907 and till 1917. It is possible to find information about the fact that logical lectures were given by P. Tihomirov in the list of philosophical and theological subjects that were taught at St.Vladimir University of Kyiv in fall semesters of 1910 [4]. P. Tihomirov recommended students the textbook on Logic by V. Minto, Th. Lipps, Ch. Sigward, A. Vvedenskyi [5].
Together with P. Tihomirov, in early 20th century V. Zenkovskii was working at the Department of Philosophy. It is known that he taught Logic after teaching course of Psychology and together with course of History of Philosophy in spring semester of first year.
The teachers of Kyiv Theological Academy and St. Vladimir University of Kyiv were the cream of Kyiv philosophical community from 19th and till the beginning of 20th centuries. Among them were those who made their contribution to the development of logic as a science and academic discipline. The issues discussed by representatives of Kyiv philosophy were in the mainstream of the Western European philosophy of those times: how can logic be reformed? In what way shall its subject matter be determined? Can logic be considered only as a formal discipline? What are the relations between logic and psychology? Can psychology be considered as a foundation of logic? May logic be considered as a philosophical discipline? Is it necessary to include epistemological issues to the scope of logical matters? What is the methodological significance of logic? What is the significance of applied logic?
Addressing these issues, Kyiv philosophers have created original conceptions of logic which pose interest, in our opinion, not only from the point of view of history of logic but also from the point of view of current streams of the logical knowledge development.
Unfortunately, not all of them had their works published. One can learn about their views only by studying the manuscripts that had been preserved. Herewith some of the manuscripts were not written by the teachers themselves but are saved in the form of students' notes written during the lectures.
Let us attempt to enumerate representatives of Kyiv academic and university philosophy who were dealing with matter of Logic. It poses interest at least with respect to the fact that some of them had sunk into oblivion for a long time and their names are still unknown in the logical community.
The prime specialist in the field of logic in the KTA was Ivan Skvortsov, an ordinary professor of Philosophy, Doctor of Theology, an Archpriest. For more than 30 years he was delivering logical lectures at the KTA and for almost 25 years at St. Vladimir University of Kyiv. His views of logic were fully represented in his handwrit-
ten lectures on logic which are accessible today at the Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine. These are notes of the lectures delivered by him in 1837 written by a KTA student Andrii Monastyriov [6].
Vasilyi Karpov is another representative of Kyiv ecclesiastical academic philosophy. He was a graduate and teacher of Philosophy disciplines (including Logic) at the KTA. Later he became an ordinary professor of the St. Petersburg Theological Academy. He was devoted to teaching for over forty years (from 1825 to 1867). His textbook 'Systematic Exposition of Logic' (1856) ranks first among his works in logic [7]. It was recognized as one of the best textbooks in logic in the Russian Empire. Unfortunately, what can be found in Kyiv archives preserved only V. Karpov's personal record for the years of 1829-1830. Neither manuscripts nor lecture notes are available in Kyiv. If they do exist at all, they should be saved in St.Petersburg.
Another representative of Kyiv philosophy is Iosif Mikhnevich, a KTA graduate and an extraordinary professor. Later he became a professor of Richelieu Lyceum (Odessa), where he was teaching all Philosophy disciplines including the course of Logic. I. Mikhnevich's views of logic are expounded in his work 'An Experience of Gradual Development of Major Thinking Activity as a Guideline for Initial Teaching of Logic'(1847) [8].
From the point of view of history of logic, textbooks of Orest Novitskyi are of great interest. Or. Novitskyi was Master of Theology and Philology, an Extraordinary Professor at the KTA, the first Ordinary Professor of Philosophy and the Dean of the first Department of the Faculty of Philosophy of St.Vladimir University of Kyiv. In 1844 his 'Compendium of Logic with Preliminary Outline of Psychology' [9] was published [6]. Besides this work, issues of logic were raised in Novitskyi's short manuscript 'Something about Logic from Novitskyi's Lectures' [10], which is accessible at the Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine.
Views of logic of another representative of Kyiv philosophy Sil-vestr Hogotskyi, a KTA graduate and later an ordinary professor of Philosophy, merited ordinary professor of St.Vladimir University of Kyiv at the department of Philosophy, Doctor of Philosophy
and Ancient Philology, are expounded in his 'Philosophy Lexicon' (1857-1873). It was the first in Russia four-volume Philosophy Encyclopedia [11].
A substantial hand-written heritage in logic has been left by another KTA ordinary professor, who later became a professor of Moscow University, Pamfil Yurkevich. His manuscripts are available at the Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine. Among them 'Curriculum and Readings in Logic' [12], 'Readings in Logic (abridged)' [13], 'Trendelenburg's Research in Logic, Abridged' [14], 'Lectures in Logic' [15], notes with regard to H.X.W. Ziegward's 'Logic' [16], 'From Logic' (lithographic lectures) [17].
The last representative of Kyiv ecclesiastical academic philosophy, who was teaching Logic at Kyiv Theological Academy, was Piotr Linitskyi, the KTA Merited ordinary professor at the Department of Logic and Metaphysics, Doctor of Theology. He left both published works and manuscripts in logic. Among his published works one can find 'Adolf Trandelenburg's Research in Logic, translated by Korsh' (1868) [18], 'On Forms and Laws of Thinking' (1895) [19], etc. Handwritten lectures in Logic by P. Linitskyi are accessible today at the Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi. These are notes of the lectures delivered by him in 1889-1890 academic years written by his student P. Kudriavtsev [20].
George Chelpanov (1862—1936) arrived at Kyiv in 1892. He held position of Head of the Department of Philosophy at St. Vladimir University of Kyiv and began to teach Logic, Psychology and Philosophy. In 1907 he returned to Moscow, where became a professor of Moscow University. His logical views were presented in a well known textbook on Logic, which had been reprinted eight times before 1917 [21].
It is interesting that each of the representatives of Kyiv academic and university philosophy has been developing different conceptions of logic. They were united only by the fact that each of them tried to solve the problem of reforming logic.This problem was becoming a topical issue. Kyiv philosophers were actively participating in the
discussions on how to reform the discipline and each was willing to propose an option.
The first research program for logic reforming was proposed by I. Skvortsov. Unlike Kh. Baumeister, who focused on artificial speculative logic, boiling down practical logic to a set of trivial techniques used in everyday life, I. Skvortsov was more original. He suggested not the logic of pure thinking but the logic oriented at a human being including 'metaphysical ontology, i.e. epistemology' and methodology of scientific cognition. This approach leads to two results.
Firstly, I. Skvortsov suggests considering logic together with epis-temology. As a rule, philosophers consider laws of thinking and laws of cognition separately. The first one relates to logic, whereas the second relates to metaphysical ontology, or epistemology. However, in I. Skvortsov's opinion, due to close relationship between thinking and cognition (thinking is a way of cognition whereas cognition is a goal of thinking) both of them should be assigned to the single science, which could be called logic. Precisely this science investigates the required and universal forms and laws of thinking and leads to correct and profound cognition.
Secondly, the philosopher maintains practical significance of logic as a science. In his opinion, in order to learn how to think and cognize the objective world correctly, it is necessary not only to know forms and laws of thinking but also to be able to apply one's knowledge in practice.
As a result, I. Skvortsov proposes the following division of his logic. The first part is the logic of reason or theory of thinking. Here it deals with forms of thinking: notion, judgment and argument. The second part is the logic of mind or theory of cognition, which is divided into analytics of feelings, analytics of common sense and analytics of reason. The third part deals with methodology or the doctrine of application of laws and forms of thinking to the process of cognition.
In doing so, I. Skvortsov clearly separates logic per se from psychology. According to him, psychology plays the role of propaedeutics to epistemology, i.e. to the second part of his logic.
Unlike I. Skvortsov, V. Karpov believed that psychology alone may be the basis for logic. Substantiating logic on the basis of psychology he thought that within the complete system of philosophy, logic together with all other formal philosophy sciences follows psychology, it is psychology that plays the role of philosophical propaedeutics. Herewith, however, in V. Karpov's opinion, there is a risk of identifying logic with psychology insofar as both sciences study the process of thinking. According to him, the difference between logic and psychology consists in two words: being and activities.
By the way, according to V. Karpov, real sciences are those that study actual things. In addition to psychology, these are history, jurisprudence and natural history. Formal sciences are those that study relations between things. These are mathematics, grammar and logic. Since all real sciences cannot exist without expressing their content in certain forms of thinking, it is logic that plays the role of a formal instrument of cognition, although it cannot enrich a researcher with the knowledge of real life facts.
So, V. Karpov defined logic as a science specifying what forms our thinking can take driven by the aspirations of the forces of our soul that are trying to cognize any object and reveal this cognition.
The basis for such logic is psychology which studies internal side of a spiritual characteristic of being. This spirit's activity is the subject-matter of logic.
Thus one can believe that V. Karpov adhered to the standpoint of psychologism in logic. However, his psychologism is not of empirical but of speculative or even theological nature.
Proceeding from the aforementioned facts, one can understand why V. Karpov divides his textbook on logic into three parts. The first part is psychological one. Here the author deals with the psychological basis of logic. The second part is logical proper where author depicts forms of thinking. And the third part is methodological, which is devoted to the issues of application-oriented, practical logic.
Comparing to the reformist programs of I. Skvortsov and V. Karpov, the program of I. Mikhnevich demonstrates certain new features. I. Mikhnevich published his works in logic after he had retired
from professorship at the KTA and moved to Richelieu Lyceum in Odessa. His program of logic reform was influenced by the lyceum specialization, which was a secular, philologically-oriented educational institution. This circumstance is most likely to be the reason for his understanding of logic as propaedeutics to philology but not to philosophy.
Comparing grammar and logic, i.e. a form of word and form of thought, I. Mikhnevich states that grammar teaches us to write and speak correctly, whereas logic teaches us to think and reason correctly. Logic is the basis for Grammar whereas Grammar is a supplement to Logic.
In view of this, I. Mikhnevich proposes the following division of logic. Firstly, it is a study on composition and formation of notions, propositions and inferences. Secondly, it is a study on the ways of connecting thoughts.
Or. Novitskyi is another representative of Kyiv ecclesiastical academic philosophy who attempted to reform logic and creatively approached to its renovation. A KTA graduate and teacher, later he moved to St.Vladimir University of Kyiv and began to teach a course of logic there.
This is how the subject matter of logic was defined by Or. Novits-kyi. Logic is a science of laws on the basis of which thinking shall process the ideas and notions accumulated in memory and apply them to objects for the purpose of perceiving their essence. As can be seen, Or. Novitskyi's definition radically differs from those considered above. While his predecessors focused on studying the process of thinking, here the process of cognition is being dealt with.
In order to study laws of thinking, one should become familiar with actions and abilities of a soul that are studied by psychology. However, Or. Novitskyi was already interested not in speculative (theoretical) psychology but in empirical (experiential) psychology, which has just appeared in West European philosophy. In his opinion, logic (together with ethics and aesthetics) is a part of experiential psychology.
Unlike his predecessors, Or. Novitskyi was consistently upholding the view of the need for integrating metaphysical and logical analysis
of thinking. Logic must, was supposed, to become metaphysical whereas metaphysics must become logical.
Proceeding to the issue of logic division, the philosopher dwells on the issue of natural thinking and artificial one, i.e. scientific thinking. He treats as natural such thinking which is subordinated to laws dictated by nature. Artificial thinking is the thinking that elaborates scientific cognition subject to certain rules.
Accordingly, Or. Novitskyi divides logic into pure logic, i.e. the science of laws of natural, universal thinking and applied logic or methodology. Pure logic studies laws and forms of correct thinking, whereas applied logic deals with the fundamental methods scientific cognition is subordinated to. According to Or. Novitskyi, these are mathematical, systematic and historical methods.
One more Kyiv philosopher, S. Hohotskyi, was reforming logic under the slogan 'Back to Aristotle!' He believed that the way out of the deadlock for logic was reached and suggested returning to the meaning imparted by Aristotle. It was an appeal to start understanding logic as an instrument of thinking.
P. Yurkevych proposed an absolutely new high-principled approach to logic reforming, distinct from that of his predecessors. He directs his search at the logic that is able to assimilate experience and be not just perceived as the basis for speculative constructions. He believes that the teaching of thinking in logic is closely related to the teaching of cognition. Logic must show what objective knowledge is conditioned by; applying what forms and laws a cognizing spirit switches from a subjective perception to objective cognition and how knowledge of an object is enhanced not on a mental basis but on a subject matter one.
The curriculum of Yurkevich's course in logic was not the standard and traditional one although he could not deviate far from the Sacred Synod's generally accepted instructions pertaining to the teaching of logic. His works were distinguished by in-depth knowledge of topic and conflicting approaches to logical knowledge in the middle of the 19th century. It was with an overview of those approaches that he started his course in logic.
The first thing that immediately catches one's attention when start examining P. Yurkevich's Kyiv lectures in logic is the fact that
he begins his course with the differentiation of formal and dialectic logic. None of the KTA professors that taught logic ever mentioned that.
P. Yurkevich highly appreciated the methodological significance of logic as a science. He believed that logic was the basis not only for theoretical but also for experiential sciences. Firstly, forms of connecting notions are absolutely identical in all sciences and these forms do not depend on the content of scientific reasoning. Secondly, the task of logic revolves around discovering the laws and norms that reveal the idea of truth.
Truth can be formal and material. Formal reflects the conformity of an object of reality with the subject matter of thought, whereas material refers to consistency of thoughts. The subject matter of logic is primarily formal truths pertaining to the correctness of reasoning but not the content thereof.
Logic is especially important for philosophy, since within philosophy perfect thinking is indispensable which makes logic a heart of philosophy.
The Kyiv philosopher emphasized the difference between logic and psychology. Psychology should study thinking as a phenomenon with all its random characteristics, which are irrelevant for the objective reality cognition. It is the task of logic to discover fundamental laws, norms, and forms of thinking and to show thinking not as it is but as it should be.
Is not it true that most of provisions of P. Yurkevich's concept can be found in modern textbooks on logic as well? In our opinion, out of all Kyiv philosophers he came closer to modern interpretation of logic as a science comparing to the others.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries logic at the KTA was taught by P. Linitskyi. He had never set the task of developing a consistent concept of logic but just attempted to discover the general foundation for this science. 'Logic is a philosophical science and in the area of philosophy one of the most important matters is the issue of general foundation and origins' [15].
Why does the philosopher consider Logic as a philosophical science? In P. Linitskyi's opinion, thinking is a common element in all kinds of cognition. However, in the purest form it is displayed
in philosophy. Therefore one of the major tasks of philosophy is research into the process of thinking. Logic is neither a part of psychology nor a science of philology but merely a branch of philosophy, a major propaedeutic disciplin. Herewith, in the philosopher's opinion, logic should be not only a formal science. It is a science that deals with cognition in general as well. It is impossible to perceive the nature of thinking without taking into account its goal which consists of cognitive activity of thinking.
G. Chelpanov believed that the main task of cognition is achievement of the truth by thinking. Logic is the science which considers how thinking should occur in order for the truth to be reached. The process of thinking which allows a person to reach the truth, Chel-panov calls valid thinking. Consequently Chelpanov perceives logic as a science about laws of valid thinking or in other words a science about laws which govern valid thinking.
He draws a clear distinction between Logic and Psychology. Thinking can be viewed from two standpoints: as a process, investigated by certain laws, and as a method of reaching the truth. The first standpoint relates to Psychology, the second one — to Logic. This is what defines a difference between them. Psychology is a descriptive science and explains how thinking processes occur. Logic is a normative science and considers norms and laws, which govern valid thinking.
Therefore, it can be stated that in the 19th century - early the 20th century logical issues were actively developed by the representatives of Kyiv Theological Academy and St.Vladimir University of Kyiv. The professors of the Departments of Philosophy have created the innovative concepts of logic, which formed the ground for teaching courses for students of these educational institutions.
However, it should be noted that identification of any tradition or approach incorporating views of Kyiv logicians is impossible. Original author's approaches are among the main reasons for this situation with perceiving of logic.
References
[1] The case of imposing a duty of teaching logic and experimental psychology on professors of theology, or religious teachers in higher educational
institutions, July 31, 1850, February 8, The State Archive of Ukraine, F.16, Op.289, Case.130.
[2] Review of Teaching at St. Vladimir University of Kyiv in the 1st half of 1885-86 academic year, with applications 4 tables of lectures, The State Scientific Archive Library, XVIII-6-1b, 0-21, Kyiv, 1885, p. 1.
[3] Curriculums and rules of Historical-Philological Department of St. Vladimir University of Kyiv, The State Scientific Archive Library, VIII-6-1b, 0-28, Kyiv, 1907.
[4] University Bulletin 11:4, 1910, The State Scientific Archive Library, 05, U-59.
[5] Minto, V., Deductive and Inductive Logic, Moscow, 1896; Lipps, Th., The Fundamentals of Logic, St. Petersburg, 1902; Sigwart, Ch., Logic, St. Petersburg, 1908; Vvedenskyi, A. I., Logic as a Part of Episte-mology, St. Petersburg, 1909.
[6] Collected works on Philosophy (1834-1840), Logic for Students of Kyiv Academy by I.M. Skvortsov, written by a KTA student Andrii Monastyriov, The Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi, KTA 348 L (Mus. 757), Vol.1.
[7] Karpov, V. N., Systematic Exposition of Logic, St. Petersburg, 1856.
[8] Mikhnevich, I. G., An Experience of Gradual Development of Major Thinking Activity as a Guideline for Initial Teaching of Logic, Odessa, 1847.
[9] Novitskyi, Or., Compendium of Logic with Preliminary Outline of Psychology, Kyiv, 1844.
[10] Collected works on Philosophy (1834-1840). Something about Logic from Novitskyi's Lectures, The Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi, KTA 348 L (Mus. 757), Vol. II.
[11] Hogotskyi, S. S., Philosophy Lexicon: 4 volumes, Kyiv, 1857-1873.
[12] Curriculum and Readings on Logic, 1863. Logical Problems. Elementary Logic. Readings, 1864, Philosophical Lectures and Notes by P.D. Yurkevich, Professor of Kyiv Academy and Moscow University, XIX century, The Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi, KTA 352 L (Mus. 818a), № 13.
[13] Readings on Logic (abridged), Philosophical Lectures and Notes by P.D. Yurkevich, Professor of Kyiv Academy and Moscow University, XIX century, The Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi, KTA 352 L (Mus. 818a), № 14.
[14] Trendelenburg's Research on Logic. Abridged, Philosophical Lectures and Notes by P.D. Yurkevich, Professor of Kyiv Academy and Moscow University, XIX century, The Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi, KTA 352 L (Mus. 818a), № 15.
[15] Lectures on Logic (1864-65 academic year), Philosophical Lectures and Notes by P.D. Yurkevich, Professor of Kyiv Academy and Moscow University, XIX century, The Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi, KTA 352 L (Mus. 818a), № 16.
[16] Notes with Regard to Ch. Sigward's 'Logic', Philosophical Lectures and Notes by P.D. Yurkevich, Professor of Kyiv Academy and Moscow University, XIX century, The Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi, KTA 352 L (Mus. 818a), № 17.
[17] From Logic (lithographic lectures), Philosophical Lectures and Notes by P.D. Yurkevich, Professor of Kyiv Academy and Moscow University, XIX century, The Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi, KTA 352 L (Mus. 818a), № 18.
[18] Linitskyi, P. I., Adolf Trendelenburg's Research in Logic, translated by Korsh (1868) and other authors (F.Iberveg, H.Ulrits, R.Zaidel, L.Rabus, I.Khoppe), Proceedings of KTA, 1871. Book 9, Book 12.
[19] Linitskyi, P. I., On Forms and Laws of Thinking, Kharkov, 1895.
[20] Linitskyi, P. I., Words and Speeches at Various Dates and Events as Student's Essays, Lectures on Logic by P.Linitskyi, written by his student P. Kudriavtsev, The Institute of Manuscripts of the National Library of Ukraine named after V.S. Vernadskyi, F.160, № 815.
[21] Chelpanov, G. I., Textbook on Logic, the 8-th edition, Moscow, 1915.
