As humans we normally depend on the four main ways of knowing; Language, emotion, sense perception and reason. Although, each way of knowing has its weakness. We usually use the ways of knowing together with one another. In some cases the area of knowledge may not use sense perception but most of the time we often believe that Math for example uses logic and reason. How true is this?
Reason is considered to be one of the most powerful ways of knowing. One main strength of reason as a way of knowing is that it seems to provide us with validity. Individuals can interpret logic to be the study of the accurate way of reasoning. It includes disputes, deceptiveness, validity, invalidity and assumption. Logic makes it easier for us to comprehend exactly what our beliefs are and demonstrates how visibly we can exhibit them. Over the years logicians have come across two ways of reasoning; inductive and deductive. Inductive reasoning is the practice of scientific morals that is use to draw the most apparent or possible conclusion from proof.
Inductive reasoning is the process of observing something for a long period of time then coming to a conclusion that it us as we observe it to be. But, due to the fact that it is based on our observation it can be considered biased meaning it doesn't really assure full certainty of knowing. For example inductive reasoning in the case of swans, a naturalist has been observing swans for a long period of time, he only sees the white swans therefore
Pascal said that we can't know certain truth, but reason is the best source of
Logical reasoning helps to develop a sense of righteousness, in comparison to simply imparting morality lessons. A child who is given reasons why a particular
4) Inductive Reasoning- Reasoning in which ideas come at the end. Global commentary and periodic sentences are inductive.
For Kathryn Schulz description in the reading “Evidence” she presents a vivid viewpoint over inductive inclinations or inductive thinking. Inductive thinking may be a method for speculation that structures our feelings as stated by those path we were brought up or those society we are starting with (Schulz).
If you research how (The Best Explanation) is generally arrived at, you will, at its heart, confront (Inductive Reasoning). Science and scientists have been employing this method forever.
This is inductive reasoning because the premise does not provide sufficient support to the conclusion.
The whole idea of being inductive is to always keeping an open mind and being a critical thinker. Furthermore, it is important to become inductive because we are able to learn things that we never thought of. For an example, being at a museum and thinking and wanting to learn something
As a teen, I often thought mathematics was primarily a subject you take in school and it wouldn’t affect any aspect of my daily life. However, mathematics I have learned throughout this course is in every aspect of my life, personal and professional. For instance, if I were to conclude a decision I made in my personal and professional life, there are two types of reasoning I might use, inductive or deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is the process of arriving at a general conclusion based on observations of specific examples and deductive reasoning, is the process of proving a specific conclusion from one or more general statements. (Blitzer, 2014, pgs. 3 & 8). I have applied inductive reason, when deciding which way would be best to take, either the highway or the main roads, to arrive at work on time. I took the highway for several weeks and the main roads. Each time on the highway I would arrive 10 to 15 minutes late for work and on the main road, I would arrive 5 to 10 minutes
Because of the fact that rationalism is one that leads the age of Enlightenment during Renaissance, reason often worshipped as the primary way of knowing in Western society. Therefore, I would like to evaluate reason first, that it is actually better ways of knowing than others or just a hype. In mathematics, which is an area of knowing that is “the poetry of logical ideas”, reason can be treated as the supreme ways of knowing. Every mathematical ideas, are logically built from certain mathematical definitions, which are known as axioms. If these theorems are not proven by this way, they cannot be accepted in mathematics. For example, the proof of Pythagorean theorem, is based on geometric axioms of square. Therefore, it is acceptable that reason can be “better” ways of knowing than others in field of mathematics. Also, in Natural science, such as Physics, avoiding emotion and praising reason often be
As opposed to a posteriori knowledge, which denotes knowledge known after or because of experience, a priori knowledge signifies what can be known without any experience at all. In addition, while empirical investigations are needed to prove knowledge from experience, logical reasoning alone suffices to prove the latter understanding. Empirical reasoning based on human senses has the possibility to be doubtful/wrong as Descartes explains “our senses…deceive us with respect to objects which are small or in the distance… (Descartes 72)”; however, logical reasoning does not have any ambiguity/doubt since it is true by in and of itself or by its definition alone. In this way, logical reasoning, which forms the basis of a priori knowledge, can only
Inductive reasoning is the process of reasoning from the general to the specific. For example, without inductive reasoning on can say eating fruit will decrease the chance of having a heart disease, but when imply inductive reasoning the best way to say that is, eating fruit like apple or grape can lower the chance of having a heart disease. On the other hand, Deductive reasoning is a logical process in which a conclusion is based on the concordance of multiple premises that are generally assumed to be true while analogy is basically a comparison between two things that are similar such as a Toyota and a Honda. Finally, causal according to the lesson, is when relating two or more events in a way to conclude how one event cause another. For
There are different ways to reasoning or understanding an issue. Those are deduction, induction, and abduction, but altogether will give a better comprehending. At the stage of abduction, the goal is to explore the data, find out a pattern, and suggest a plausible hypothesis or explanation; deduction is to build a logical and testable hypothesis based upon other reasonable premises; and induction is the approximation towards the truth in order to fix our beliefs for further inquiry. While deduction and induction are more logical thinking, abduction is more about critical thinking due to the search of explanations of an issue. Abduction and deduction are the conceptual understanding of a phenomenon, and induction is the calculable verification.
Philosophers create new thesis all the time. Many times these thesis are challenged by other ideas. The Problem of induction was introduced by David Hume in the 18th century. He questioned how past observation could be the same observation in the future. We can assume that past events can occur again, and this was not the problem. The problem is Hume does not believe that past experiences can lead to the future. It is beneficial to completely understand Hume’s stand point therefore I will explain the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning is multiple premises that are believed to be true or at least true most of the time. Deductive reasoning is a theory that claims truth. If the premise is true the conclusion is true. Hume first separated human reasoning in two different ways. The first way is relations of ideas. These are the sciences of geometry, algebra and
A writer named Nalini Singh once said “Emotion without reason lets people walk all over you; reason without emotion is a mask for cruelty”. When looking at the ways of knowing, one can see that they all exist individually. The ways of knowing are what provide us with the necessary understanding in order to develop information in an area of knowledge. The ways of knowing accumulate knowledge by different means and often provide insight into different aspects of knowledge. When one way of knowing is used, this does not mean that another should be used as well. However, to strengthen one's knowledge upon a certain topic they co-exist and correspond together in order for the person to fully understand the topic at hand. For example, both reason and intuition when presented together can show a greater understanding in an area of knowledge rather than just one of the two. The use of multiple ways of knowing is more likely to allow for a deeper understanding of an area of knowledge.
Knowledge can be defined as information gained through sense perception, emotion, language and reason, while it is defined by Plato as “justified true belief.” The claim that knowledge takes the form of a combination of stories and facts is however not accurate in history and biology. First, it brings up the questions of what are stories and what are facts. Stories are accounts of past events from somebody’s perspective, while a fact is the truth. When looking at the two areas of knowledge, they each favour one side of the combination over the other. For example, knowledge from history mostly takes the form of stories, while knowledge from biology mostly takes the form of facts. This distinction between the different types of knowledge leads to the knowledge questions of “How do we obtain knowledge in the different areas of knowing?” and “To what extend is knowledge in certain areas of knowledge subjective or objective?”