What is the true logic of modern culture?

The so-called modern logic refers to the logic that has developed in the context of modern culture and social development, as opposed to the traditional logic established by Aristotle and perfected in the Middle Ages, including modern inductive logic. As far as its content is concerned, modern logic mainly refers to mathematical logic and the logic developed on the basis of mathematical logic. Mathematical logic is the study of mathematical reasoning logic, belonging to the category of mathematical foundations. At present, modern logic has gradually developed from a single discipline into a group of disciplines with rigorous theories, numerous branches and wide applications. The basic theory of modern logic is multifaceted, roughly including mathematical logic, philosophical logic, natural language logic, cross-study of logic and computer science, modern inductive logic and other aspects. The scope of modern logic research is still expanding, and many new branches of logic are emerging in large numbers, and logic research is undergoing a profound change in terms of concept, object, scope and method. However, on the whole, modern logic has failed to realize the second leap -- like the leap from traditional logic to modern logic, it has failed to keep pace with the development of social sciences -- realizing the transition from modern social sciences to contemporary social sciences.

Instead, the social sciences as a whole have been developing steadily and continuously, and from the 1850s to the 1920s, the major disciplines of modern social sciences--history, economics, political science, sociology, anthropology, and so on--were successively formed. And since the 1930s, there has been a new separation of modern social sciences, with some disciplines becoming richer and becoming the main disciplines of contemporary social sciences (e.g., economics, political science, sociology, anthropology); some marginalized (e.g., history, geography); and some declining (e.g., statecraft, orientalism, etc.). At the same time some traditional social sciences (e.g., jurisprudence, social psychology) have re-emerged as the main disciplines of contemporary social sciences. Thus, contemporary social sciences are a disciplinary field between the humanities (e.g., philosophy, literature, arts, etc.) and the natural sciences. The development process of contemporary social sciences is characterized by the integration of paradigms from different disciplines (especially research methods and procedures, research themes, basic assumptions, concepts, theories, etc.), the focus on "problems", and the emphasis on the practicality of knowledge, its application, or the ability to solve social problems, in general, taking the road of hybridization and holism.

The realization and development of contemporary social sciences from the realization of modern logic to see why modern logic can not realize the contemporary transformation, how to realize the contemporary transformation of modern logic, how to realize the contemporary innovation and development of modern logic so as to realize the contemporary logic, is a very worthy of study of the theme. However, it is a pity that not enough attention has been paid to this theme at home and abroad, and no systematic and comprehensive research on this theme has been seen, except that some scholars have a certain degree of understanding of a certain aspect and angle of this issue, for example, some scholars [1] pointed out that the positioning of economic logic should be modern inductive logic, rather than formal logic. We believe that carrying out research on this topic is not only to promote the realization of contemporary logic, but more importantly - we envision the construction of contemporary logic as a problem-solving logic, which will be more effective in realizing its applied value. Therefore, if this theme is carried out and completed, it will not only have the theoretical significance of realizing the transformation of modern logic into contemporary logic, but also produce a great value of social productivity, and truly realize the application of logic and the dynamics of thinking.

We envision that the research on this theme, in close connection with the development and themes of economics, political science, sociology, jurisprudence, social psychology, and other contemporary social sciences, will be problem-centered, and will adopt a variety of specific research methods, such as historical analysis and cultural interpretation, empirical analysis, and comparative application, to realize the construction of the contemporary application of modern logic on the basis of the basic theories and methods of modern logic, and thus promote the transformation of modern logic into contemporary logic. It will realize the contemporary applied construction of modern logic based on the basic theories and methods of modern logic, so as to promote the transformation of modern logic to contemporary logic. The main contents and difficulties include the following aspects: (1) what are the main disciplines of contemporary logic and why; (2) what kind of impetus modern logic gets from the revelation of the development of contemporary social sciences and how it develops; (3) the contemporary economic logic under the economic problems and theories of economics and its application in political and economic activities; (4) the power to explain the model of political development and the rules of the game of political decision making logic and its application in political, social, and economic activities; (5) complex logic (one of the complexity sciences) that deduces social changes and predicts the future of society and its application in social activities, human development, and international relations; (6) contemporary legal logic or logic of stability that regulates and guides the construction and process of the rule of law and its application in rule of law and post-legalism activities; (7) logic of mind that provides insight into the psychological interface between society and human beings and its application in social and post-legalism activities; and (8) logic of mind that explains social problems and economic theory and how they develop. mechanism of mental logic and its application in social change, psychosocial activities, and human activities. It should be said that if these aspects can be realized, the result will inevitably be what makes the subject innovative.

All knowledge is based on the beliefs that human beings **** have, the belief in nature and then there is the emergence and development of natural sciences, the human ego's thinking, the belief in the mind and then there are philosophies and religions, the society is between nature and the human mind, there is no nature and there is no "social" existence. Society is between nature and human mind, without nature, there is no physical basis for the existence of "society", and without human self-perception of the mind, there is no intellectual basis for the existence of "society", so social sciences are based on the beliefs of human beings on the basis of **** rationality. Modern social science in the process of realizing the transition to contemporary social science, play a huge role in promoting factors are no more than two, one is the height of the modern society and rapid development, people in the past knowledge is not enough for the reality of the need, always strive to obtain new knowledge, so the modern social science to the transformation of the contemporary social science has become inevitable inevitable; the second is the rapid breakthrough of the self paradigm of modern social science. Typical cases in this regard include the deconstruction of the concept of Popperian social science, the Marx-Weber social science research methodology and the return of the "human" nature of social science.

The concept of social science is a fundamental issue in the philosophical study of social science. As one of the most influential philosophers of science in the 20th century, Popper's deconstruction of this fundamental issue has in fact realized the transformation of modern social sciences into contemporary social sciences, eliminated the hegemonic inertia of knowledge, and emancipated people's minds and freed their thinking. Popper's concept of social science has three basic stipulations: limited rationality, the combination of normative and natural laws, and a certain unity between scientific rationality and liberal democracy. Popper's concept of social science is on the one hand normative and maintains a certain continuity with the traditional concept of science, and on the other hand, it has an open and dynamic character, reflecting to a certain extent the social ontology and Popper's philosophical thought. This concept of Popper highlights the attempt to integrate the Western rational tradition and the liberal democratic tradition, as well as reflecting a certain trend of mutual integration of science and humanities in the field of social sciences, which is of great significance in contemporary times [2].

If the concept of social sciences seeks to help people sweep away the hegemonic inertia of knowledge, then the Marx-Weber methodology of social science research is a reminder of how to sweep away the hegemonic inertia of knowledge.

From the perspective of the mainstream trend of social science research in today's world, there is a trend of "running from the natural sciences to the social sciences". Various research modes, means, methods and concepts of natural sciences are penetrating into the field of social sciences. However, this does not mean that there is only one natural science methodology. Social sciences and natural sciences certainly have "integration", "common" side, but does not deny the possibility and necessity of establishing an independent social science methodology. Max Weber is a successful experimenter. Max Weber is sure about the position of the research subject in the research, but he thinks that the subjective intervention of the subject should not take place in the process and tendency of the object's own display, in which case the subject must objectify himself and become another object of the research object, which is relatively easy to do in the natural sciences. Natural phenomena do not change because of the subjective wishes of the subject of research, but the social sciences are different, the object of research in the social sciences may be subject to change by the subjective wishes of the subject of research, or even the entire information on the same issue, the researcher retains the material that conforms to his own wishes, and as a result of which the conclusions of the research that appear in front of the public may be false. Max Weber, at the same time, argued that social facts are completely different from natural facts, which are characterized by their relevance to values, while natural facts are the exact opposite. Therefore, there is a principle boundary between research in the natural sciences and research in the social sciences. Weber deduced from this that the usage of the notion of law in the natural sciences rarely pays off in the social sciences, especially in the study of history. In the natural sciences, the more universally applicable a law is, the more important and valuable it is to the exact natural sciences. But in the social sciences it is the other way around; the most universal laws are precisely the most empty and often the least valuable. Realizing the above problems in social science research, Max Weber viewed the subjective intervention of the research subject as a function of the subject's value system. Therefore, he proposed a "value-neutral" approach to research.

Obviously, while Marx-Weber's value neutrality as a research paradigm is certainly tremendously productive, it has no contemporary relevance as a value trade-off, and therefore contemporary social science, otherwise moving towards human nature, is bound to value human beings for their values, rather than discarding them. "In Hume's words, a discipline, however far it may appear to be removed from the problem of human nature, must in the end come down to the problem of human nature, and the study of man, or of the problem of human nature, is the only firm foundation on which other disciplines are established" [3].

Before the 19th century, the West did not turn the social sciences into science. The scientificization of the social sciences came first from history, which began to be scientific in the late 18th and 19th centuries when it rejected the traditional imperial approach to biography and reinterpreted history. Then came disciplines such as economics and political science. All of these social sciences sought to utilize Newtonian procedures to solve problems. It should be said that the 19th century was the age of reason, and Hegel developed it to its peak. the 20th century was an age of irrationality, and the whole 20th century was anti-Hegelian. Specifically, China's social science research is still more of a "response researcher" than a social scientist. In research, most people regard themselves as policy makers rather than social scientists, and the logical starting point of research is problematic. China's social science research needs real social scientists, not just policy and political researchers, although such research is sometimes necessary. By linking the development of social science in China over the past 150 years and the dominant role of politics in the transformation of different knowledge between China and the West, it is possible to understand why there has been more policy research than scientific research in social science research in China, and to understand that modern Chinese social science has little to offer in the development of social science in the contemporary world. This point is also very important for us to think about how we can realize the construction of contemporary logic under the conditions of contemporary social science.