Analytic Logic

The focus of Analytical Logic, the most prevalent type of contemporary Academic Logic, is 'Valid Inference'. An 'Inference' is a transition from one or more assertions to another one, and a 'Valid' Inference is one that is 'Truth-preserving', namely one in which given the Truth of the initial assertions, the subsequent one cannot be False. Unlike in its ancestor, Aristotelian Deductive Logic, the nature of Valid Inference is vague in Analytic Logic. Aristotle's Deductive process reflects, as Dewey has shown, the pattern of connections described by his scientific classficatory technique, which captures the Genus-Species relation in Nature, i. e. a container-contained relation. Hence, Valid Inference for Aristotle is an accurate description, and, accordingly, Invalid Inference imagines a connection that does not obtain in actuality. But with the rise of Modern Science, with its shift in focus from the Genus-Species relation to Cause-and-Effect, on the bases of the innovations of Bacon, and the debunking by Hume, Inductive Logic emerged as best capturing the patterns of Scientific description. Thus, despite the admirable efforts of the likes of Russell, the relevance of Deductive Logic has dwindled over the centuries, to the extent that Analytic Logic often seems little more than a game of symbol-manipulation referring to nothing other than itself. For example, in it, a False assertion followed by a False assertion qualifies as a Valid Inference, which it attempts to justify by reference to 'possible worlds'. Now, the process of adding a True assertion to pre-given True assertion is an Evolvement. But if Analytic Logic is to recognize itself as a special case of Evolvemental Logic, it will have to begin by examining its own premises.