85 A journal of the AMERICAN Journal of Engineering, Mechanics and Architecture www. grnjournal.us AMERICAN Journal of Engineering, Mechanics and Architecture Volume 01, Issue 08, 2023 ISSN (E): 2993-2637 THEORETICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL FOUNDATIONS FOR FORMING ARGUMENTATION AND PROOF OF BELIEF U.X. Adambaev Senior Lecturer at Urgench Ranch Technological University Annotation: In this article, the logical structure of argumentation is the structure of proof, the interconnection of thesis and grounds in argumentation differs from that of proof in some aspects, the purpose of argumentation is to change trust and belief, the method of authorities is a study of interest in power and authority, and reasoning and proving opinions is a complex logical process. which discusses the use of one or more interconnected discussion systems. Key words: argumentation, thesis, demonstration, intuition, belief, authority, tradition. Аннотация: Мазкур мақолада Аргументлашнинг мантиқий тузилиши исботлашнинг тузилиши, Аргументлашда тезис ва асосларнинг ўзаро боғланиши исботлашникидан баъзи жиҳатларига кўра фарқ қилаши, Аргументлашдан мақсад ишонч-эътиқодни ўзгартириши, Авторитетлар методи хокимиятга, нуфузга қизиқишни ўрганиш ўлароқ юзага келиши ва фикр-мулоҳазаларни асослаш, далиллаш мураккаб мантиқий жараён бўлиб, унда бир ёки ундан ортиқ ўзаро боғланган муҳокамалар системасидан фойдаланиш хақида фикр мулоҳазалар баён қилинган. Калит сўзлар: аргументлаш, тезис, демонстрация, интуиция, эътиқод, авторитет, урф- одат. Аннотация: В данной статье логическая структура аргументации представляет собой структуру доказательства, взаимосвязь тезисов и оснований в аргументации в некоторых аспектах отличается от структуры доказательства, целью аргументации является изменение доверия-убеждения, возникает метод авторитетов. как исследование интереса к власти и авторитету, а также обоснование мнений и доказательств представляет собой сложный логический процесс, в котором рассматривается использование одной или нескольких взаимосвязанных дискуссионных систем. Ключевые слова: аргументация, тезис, демонстрация, интуиция, убеждение, авторитет, традиция. The logical structure of argumentation is similar to the structure of evidence. Its structure includes: a thesis (reasoning, a system of reasoning that needs to be proven), arguments given in support of the thesis, and a way of connecting theses and arguments (or demonstration) - a form of thinking. In argumentation, the relationship between thesis and premises differs in some respects from the relationship between evidence. Argumentation requires the interaction of at least two subjects (speaker and listener, speaker and audience, supporter and opponent, addressee and addressee) - dialogue. Argumentation also manifests itself in a monologue - a person’s conversation with 86 A journal of the AMERICAN Journal of Engineering, Mechanics and Architecture www. grnjournal.us himself. But since this process is often carried out through internal speech, studying it from the outside causes certain difficulties. Logic studies argumentation in the form of dialogue. The purpose of argumentation is to change beliefs. Various arguments are used to achieve this goal. Reasons, definitions, axioms, theorems, laws and other empirical and theoretical generalizations serve as arguments. The facts presented as an argument must be interconnected and related to the essence of the thesis. In our opinion, it would be correct to take into account the fact that the theory of argumentation has gone through such a long historical process that it will continue to develop further in the future. In scientific literature, “the concept of argument (Latin argumentum - evidence) is to substantiate an idea, opinion or system of opinions by direct reference to reality (based on observation, experimental experiment, etc.) or with the help of other opinions, the truth of which is already proven" is described as The first knowledge about the methods of forming beliefs is described in ancient Indian and ancient philosophy. By the second half of the 20th century, the study of non-universal methods of argumentation in the formation of beliefs reached a new level. This process was greatly influenced by the formation of various approaches to the theory of argumentation. In scientific studies of Western scientists such as A. Bergson, P. Feyerabend, J. Habermas, B. Russell, D. Moore, the influence of authority, common sense, and loyal habits on the formation of trust was studied. Russian scientists A. Aivin, E. Lisanyuk, A.E. It can be noted that some aspects of the problem we are studying have been studied in the scientific works of Reshetova and others. Valuable opinions were also expressed by scientists of our republic on issues studied in the doctoral dissertations of T. Tuychieva “The Role of Customs and Traditions in the System of Spiritual Values of the Uzbek People” and M. Umarova “The Role of Customs and Traditions in the Development of National Relations.” But for them this issue is not related to faith. The same situation is typical for monographs and textbooks by E. Goziev, B. Khusanov, L. Mukhamadzhonova. Valuable opinions on this issue were expressed in the scientific research of D. Fayzikhadzhaeva, one of the philosophers of our republic. However, the issue of contextual argumentation and belief formation has not been studied as a separate topic. Professor D. Faizikhojaeva describes “contextual argumentation - argumentation whose effectiveness is limited to a specific audience” and describes that “it uses traditions, authorities, intuition, faith, common sense, taste, etc. as arguments.” In our opinion, the method of non-universal argumentation, which is subjective in nature and does not directly refer to the results of experience or theoretical reasoning, is based on intuition, beliefs, authority, traditions and other social arguments that may lie at the basis. and in logic is called contextual argumentation. They are used on a more everyday level of consciousness. Intuition is the ability to directly reach the truth without any discussion or evidence. The word “intuition” comes from the Latin word “intuitio,” which means “to look closely.” Intuition is a unique way of thinking. Thanks to intuition, a person can understand the essence of a complex phenomenon without paying attention to its various parts. At the same time, to one degree or 87 A journal of the AMERICAN Journal of Engineering, Mechanics and Architecture www. grnjournal.us another, individual parts of the thought process are not understood, but mainly the result of thinking - only the truth is clearly and clearly recorded. Although intuition is considered a sufficient basis for determining truth, it is not considered sufficient to convince others of that truth. This method is interested in “concrete” thoughts, that is, in changing a preconceived “apparent reality” to a concrete reality. Very few people in the history of philosophy have ever resisted the temptation of intuition to discover truth. Thus, all the great astronomers, including Copernicus, believed that the orbits of the planets should be circular. Before Gauss, no mathematician or physicist had questioned the idea that two straight lines could not enclose a field. Similar examples abound: the whole is greater than its parts; the characterization is unsystematic; sin of bigamy; for nothing happens without an adequate cause. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to distinguish thought from intuition. Opinions are accepted as facts. For example, land is a house, but this is a mistaken belief. It is known that intuition is a function of current behavior and early practice. The point is that our absolute feeling or opinion should not be formulated in the form of a question, but it is necessary to check our intuition. Conviction is a set of views that inspire a person’s trust and, therefore, determine his actions in work, serving as his life program. Beliefs may be based on unproven assumptions or uncritically studied a priori knowledge. Belief, like intuition, is subjective in nature and changes over time. Of course, when thinking about faith, it is important to distinguish between blind faith and knowledge- based faith, which is the result of historical and life experience. Only strong faith can act as an argument in determining the truth of thoughts and opinions and accepting them as truth. Authority (autoritas - power, influence) - in a broad sense, the unofficial influence of a person or organization, recognized by the majority, in various spheres of public life. The concept of “authority” is used in the sense of an authoritative, significant, authoritative source. Reliance on authority means turning to authoritative, reliable, and authoritative sources to substantiate the truth of an opinion. The opinions and opinions of individuals, entries in sacred religious books, in particular, suras and verses written in the Koran, folk proverbs and words of wisdom are used as an authoritative source. The authority method originated as a study of interest in power and influence. When one holds one's thoughts firmly and follows the essence of a source that is considered sacred. An emphasis on religion or quoting a holy book is necessary when seeking solutions to controversial issues or making decisions in court. How to dress for a funeral, what syntactical rules a writer should write, what product an entrepreneur should produce, how to behave during a social crisis such as war - these recurring problems are solved by the authoritarian method. Two forms of authoritarian manifestations can be distinguished. The first form is inevitable and justified. This form is used when there is no time or opportunity to solve any problems. For example, what diet or exercise helps relieve symptoms of stress, or what weight system the Egyptians used. Unable to draw a definite conclusion on this matter, we turn to a recognized authority. For them, turning to authority is the last “refuge”; we either keep it to ourselves (we come to a reasonable conclusion), or (when the time comes) slightly change the authority’s opinion. In the second form, power introduces certain sources of reliable and decisive decisions and encourages the approval of their decisions by external forces. Thus, humanity is threatened, and although there are several suitable alternatives before it, it remains in its habit. 88 A journal of the AMERICAN Journal of Engineering, Mechanics and Architecture www. grnjournal.us The purpose of this method is to eliminate long-standing differences in authority, achieving unanimity and stability in trust. Buddhists do not accept Christians, and Christians reject the authority of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and the Koran. However, experts say that there are several errors. Moreover, regulation through power is impossible, and another path will have to be chosen. If this method is not enriched with other methods, it will remain unclear. The scope and duration of authority will vary. With the passage of time or changes in the scope of application, the position of the authorities may worsen. Only widespread and permanent, regular authorities are a sufficient basis for determining the truth of opinions. In the East, the Koran and Hadith, as well as the time-tested opinions of prominent religious figures, philosophers and scientists, reflecting universal human values, are considered the most reliable, important and authoritative sources for resolving issues of public life. , regulating relations between people and society and determining the truth of knowledge. It is typical for our national mentality to accept these sources without evidence in discussions and debates, and to rely on them in thinking. Such authorities do not lose their value under the influence of historical conditions and political changes; they will stand the test of time. The wise words of great thinkers, universal moral values, proverbs reflecting the socio-historical experience of peoples, which are part of the treasury of universal spiritual culture, are also sufficient evidence to substantiate the truth of opinions. At the beginning of the XXI-st century, the pace of life has accelerated to an unparalleled level, and the flow of information has increased, as a result of which authority - authoritative sources take on new meaning and appear in different forms. The youth of our society receives various information and information not only in educational institutions, but also through the media and the Internet. Along with receiving information that is useful and necessary for their education, they are also exposed to information that is directed against our moral values. Some young people recognize the media and the Internet as the authority, rather than their parents and mentor teachers, and take their information as truth when learning and determining their attitude to life. They pay almost no attention to the sources of information, the level of truthfulness, the main thing is that it is interesting and meets their needs. The media and some information on the Internet have a negative impact on the formation of life concepts in young people, whose spiritual world is just being formed, and personal experience is not enough to distinguish truth from lies and fiction. Therefore, a sign of intelligence and prudence is to pay attention to the reliability and truth of the arguments when substantiating an opinion. It is necessary to distinguish between authoritarian and authoritarian thinking. Authoritarianism is a modified, distorted form of rationalism, a way of thinking devoid of innovation and creativity, in which the task of reasoning and determining its truth is assigned to authorities. The issue of power is complex and multifaceted. For this reason, when justifying the truth of opinions, it is necessary to use authoritative opinions in accordance with specific conditions, following the norm. Tradition is behavior, a way of behaving in the same form, which is inherited from generation to generation and accepted by a certain society or social group and has a certain influence on the way 89 A journal of the AMERICAN Journal of Engineering, Mechanics and Architecture www. grnjournal.us of life and thinking of people. Thinking and acting based on traditions often manifests itself within the framework of people's lives, moral standards and folk rituals. Habit or inertia makes us feel comfortable and continue to believe our thoughts because we live them. According to our habits, when conflicting thoughts come to our minds, we try to avoid them. Our frequently repeated habits increase our confidence by convincing us that the path or sect we are following is the right one. If someone tells us that our country, our race, our language or our religion is wrong, we begin to isolate ourselves from the truth or views that contradict the beliefs we always rely on. When our habits are challenged by facts, we become frustrated and try to change our thoughts. It will be very difficult at first, but later it can become a habit, even a better skill than before. The endurance method may not always protect habitual skills that are relied upon. The faith of mankind is not the same, since in certain historical processes the general views of societies were different and people tried to protect their personal and social interests. It is impossible not to always pay attention to the “pressure” of other opinions. A man who is faithful in his own way is sometimes forced to admit his shortcomings. When the breadth of other views is felt, this method does not have the ability to draw conclusions from conflicting opinions. And because of the loss of his only form of trust, he feels the need for fixed views. The national idea and national ideology are absorbed into the consciousness of members of society through traditions. The attitude of a society or social group towards a person or event is based on certain traditions. To justify an action, they think that “according to our customs...”. Argumentation is a complex logical process that uses one or more interrelated systems of reasoning. Justification of the truth of opinions, reliance on reliable arguments in proof is one of the most important features of thinking and ensures the logic, orderliness and persuasiveness of our thoughts. REFERENCES 1. Ruzavin G.I. Methodological problems of argumentation. - Moscow, 997. - Pp. 34-35. 2. Institute of Philosophy and Law named after I. Mominov of the Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Uzbekistan. Encyclopedic dictionary of philosophy. -T.: "National Encyclopedia of Uzbekistan" state scientific publishing house 2010. P. 24. 3. Makovelsky A.O. History of logic. M.: Science1967, P. 22. 4. Faizikhodjaeva D.I. Abu Nasr al-Farabi and Abu Ali Ibn Sina on logical proof. - T. Nishan Publisher, 2013. P. 144.