Abstract

One of the fundamental subjects of logic philosophy has been the question of inference formal validity independence in regard to psychology and subjectivity. This paper proposes and examines the thesis formed by the following statements: the anti-psychologism position, defended by the Frege-Husserl tradition, meant as a foundation for the formal-symbolic approach as logic essence. Anti-psychologism main arguments, which affirm that logic is not reducible to psychology, are precisely the arguments that defend the idea of logic being, and having to be, only and essentially formal. Therefore, necessity, accuracy, prescription, and universality all depend on formality; based on some current cognitive science approaches, especially those of Stennings and van Lambalgen, the idea that the nature of logic is exclusively founded on formality and symbolism is critically examined.