3) Deductive Reasoning- Reasoning in which ideas are at the beginning and proof follows. Essays, textual commentary, and loose sentences are deductive.
Week 1 DQ 2 The Scope and Limits of Logic Logic can do a great deal in helping us understand our arguments. Explain what advantages we obtain by studying logic in terms of
Inductions, a series of examples, can be used to verify a major premise, which can then be the framework for deductions, by applying it to a specific case (minor premise). Deductive reasoning can be structured as a syllogism, a “logical structure that uses the major premise and minor premise to reach a necessary conclusion.” In this case, if the major and minor premise are true, then the conclusion is logically valid. In Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s The Declaration of Sentiments, both induction and deduction are used.
Induction is a form of reasoning where the premises support the conclusion, but do not confirm that the conclusion is true. To justify induction, we are required to justify that we can infer that experiences we have never experienced will resemble those that we have experienced. Making inductive inferences is necessary for everyday life as well as in science. It is rational to rely on inductive arguments in everyday life for claims such as “the sun will rise tomorrow.” But inductive arguments require that nature is uniform. For example, tomorrow the laws of physics will continue to work the same as how they have in the past, so the world will continue spinning and the sun will rise. This perceived uniformity (the principle of uniformity of nature) allows claims like the one previously outlined to be easily understood. Although inductive arguments are useful, whether or not they can be justified is a topic of debate. In James Van Cleve’s “Reliability, Justification and the Problem of Induction,” he uses an inductive argument to attempt to justify induction. In his justification he claims that his method of argument is not circular. I argue that his reasoning is problematic because an inductive argument is not able to justify induction, mainly because inductive arguments presuppose the Principle of the Uniformity of Nature.
On the other hand, President Obama relied on both inductive and deductive reasoning types (Evans, 2012). Using inductive reasoning, President Obama was able to identify the key issues such as his purpose in improving alliances with countries across world and justified the ideas into a conclusion.
First, deductive reasoning is “a truth-guaranteeing type of reasoning, meaning that if the premises of a deductive argument are correct, then the conclusion must inescapably
A deductive argument is an argument that is intended by the user to be valid and to guarantee the truth of the conclusion given that premises are true. An inductive argument is an argument that is intended by the user to be strong or good enough that, if the premises were to be true, then it would be unlikely that the conclusion itself is false. An example of a deductive argument would be; Socrates was a man. All men are mortal. Therefore, Socrates was mortal. An example of an inductive argument would be; Socrates was Greek. Most Greeks ate fish. Socrates at fish.
Inductive Reasoning I think one of the best examples of Inductive Reasoning I used was the explanation of how efficient markets spur the growth and expansion of economic growth and how that is tied into globalization. As stated above, “Many Americans do not appreciate how efficient our markets are, in this case efficiency in reference to supply and demand is number one. These efficient markets allow economies to grow. As many have learned in a global world, when one economy grows, it spurs growth in
The reason induction originated as a concept of reasoning did not come from its ability to result in proofs, but the usefulness in predicting future occurrences which it allows. As an example of this principle, we can bring into the light the supposed laws of nature which provide constants to our physical world. For any number of the infinite reasons at any instantaneous point of time exceptions to the laws of nature can emerge. Due to this fact, and the fact that the laws of nature are based on a finite number of circumstances of which permanence is assumed, laws of nature cannot be fully proven. However, without the human assumption of the existence of laws of nature, the progress of science would be halted. The laws of nature serve as an exceptional example of how even without a definite proof, inductive reasoning enables leaps in knowledge and
When answering discussion questions, be sure to format it. Inductive arguments claim that their conclusion probably follows from the premises. As a result, inductive arguments are either stronger or weaker, rather than either true or false. Some words and phrases commonly used in inductive arguments are probably, most likely, chances are, it is reasonable to suppose, we can expect, and it seems probable that. There are three common types of inductive arguments. Generalizations are drawing conclusions. Analogies are based on comparisons. Causal arguments are claiming this is the cause of that.
Chapter 7, deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is taking a general case that is understood and making it specific. For deductive reasoning to take place you first have to have a general idea about what it is. Once you have a
Inductive Reasoning Peplau defined her inductive approach in both general and specific terms. The inductive approach for concept naming are described in several steps (a) observing behaviors for which no explanatory concepts are available, (b) seeking to repeat those observations in others under similar conditions, (c) noting regularities concerning the
Inductive Reasoning — The ability to combine pieces of information to form general rules or conclusions (includes finding a relationship among seemingly unrelated events).|
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
5a. Inductive and deductive reasoning are key elements in research. Describe these processes in detail. Deduction process : application of a general theory to a specific case . Induction process : A process where we observe a specific phenomenon and on this basis we arrive at a general conclusion .