LINGUISTIC AND PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS OF THE DEBATE IN COMMUNICATION

Аннотация

The article reflects the theoretical-philosophical and linguistic aspects of the debate and controversy in communication. His obedience to the principle of logic is proved by examples. KEYWORDS: - linguistics, communication, philosophy, logic, strategy. nervous about anything related to intellectual I NTRODUCTION powers, and we don't want to agree that what we said before was wrong and what the opponent said The term debate is synonymous with the word was right” [2, p. 512]. In order to win the debate, it eristics, which in ancient Greek means “art of is very important to be aware of logical knowledge. debate”. It was originally used by the Sophists. The bridge between logic and linguistics is firmly Aristotle in his time described eristics as “the art of established in the science of the ancient world, in unbiased debate”: “Through this art, you can prove which the Sophists, from Socrates to Aristotle to your right in any dispute, even if you are behind the Farobi and Ibn Sina, based their knowledge on the truth”, he said [1]. Eristics is the process by which a concepts. According to the laws of thinking, the person constantly strives to prove that he or she is conclusion reflects in a generalized, abstract way right, and it occurs in many situations: in the family, the things and events in the objective being, the at work, in scientific discussions, in public debates, various relations and connections between them. At and in conversations. The work of the German the same time, he always adheres to the principle of philosopher A. Schopenhauer “The Art of truthfulness, that is, he reflects the events of Swallowing in Debate” is one of the best works existence as true as possible [3, p. 17]. Hence, written in the XIX century, which describes the contemplation serves man to reflect the world methods of winning 33 disputes, using the methods accurately and truthfully. With the help of language, of the ancient Sophists [2, pp. 523-548]. But knowledge is collected, synthesized, generalized, researchers have expressed their views that not all conclusions are drawn and passed from one of them are impartial. Everyone's desire to win the generation to another. Language is, in essence, contest is therefore strong: “Our brains are very subject to the principles of objectivity, logic, CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL 100 SCIENCES ISSN – 2767-3758 https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjps CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES 2(9): 100- 104, September 2021 DOI: https://doi.org/10.37547/philological-crjps-02-09-22 ISSN 2767-3758 ©2021 Master Journals Accepted25thSeptember, 2021 & Published 30thSeptember, 2021 evolution, and historicity. Therefore, the unity of other and walk side by side. At that moment, when language and thought has long united such areas as a man with a hundred secrets spoke, listened to logic, dialectics, rhetoric, eristics, for which it has their arguments, took the money from them, and served and continues to serve as a common source. bought grapes from the market, all four of them It is natural and necessary for every science to be were amazed to see that he wanted something, and based on logic. The science of logic is also their wishes came true and they reconciled [6, pp. inextricably linked with the science of language. 8-11]. Of course, J. Rumi cited this narration to Linguist A.Nurmanov writes about this in his figuratively emphasize that, despite the diversity of monograph “Syntactic Theories of Speech": The religions, it essentially leads to one destination. At phenomenon of prediction is not only the basis of the same time, the philosopher-scientist argues speech, but also the basis of judgment. Traditional through narration that material or spiritual logic stems from the attributive nature of judgment. interests underlie the controversy. We say that the Accordingly, the sentence structure always consists spiritual or material interests of a person are at the of a subject and a predicate. Its formula is S + R or heart of the debate. not S + R” [4, p. 26]. R. Gelgardt, one of the Russian linguists of the 20th century, also expressed his opinion on the T movement of the participants of the dialogue in HE MAIN FINDINGS AND RESULTS terms of interests: “Dialogue is conducted in a certain pattern: interest - the answer to the Ways to win the debate will also be linked to logic. interest” [7, p. 58]. What is said for “benefit” comes Debate is a term of strategy along with the art of from the reaction to something, from the eristics. The term is said to have been coined by evaluation. The attitude depends on how the European Researchers R. Green and H. F. Zenger [5, speaker assesses the situation. “The basic principle p. 55]. Although strategies first appeared in China of evaluation is that the world exists for man, man is as a military science, it should be noted that later as not for the world. Therefore, the basis of any a science of thinking and coping in several fields, as