The Basic Understanding Of Knowledge

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.

The main argument here is that the knowledge represents for me the basis of my values, from which I learned most things, which in return guided me to the other good values like the honesty, responsibility and accountability. I highly believe that the knowledge is the major source of all other good

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.

Inductive reasoning stands for the arguments that do not preserve the truth, unlike the deductive reasoning. There is no guarantee in inductive reasoning even if the premises are true that the conclusion will be true. The premises bring forth the probability most in life situations. In inductive reasoning, the premises are described to be weak, implausible or cogent, and they form the basis for the drawn conclusion as the evidence available determines whether the argument is strong or weak.

3) Deductive Reasoning- Reasoning in which ideas are at the beginning and proof follows. Essays, textual commentary, and loose sentences are deductive.

Formal (ways of making statements that can be math proved/ scientifically proved “if not this, then that”

Q1A) In what ways does the biological constitution of a living organism determine, influence or limit its sense perception?

22.  A ________________ is a fundamental form of reasoning where one proposition is inferred from two others.

Deductive Reasoning — The ability to apply general rules to specific problems to produce answers that make sense.|

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

Vera Nazarian once stated “Whenever you read a good book, somewhere in the world a door opens to allow in more light.” Similarly, the book X: A Novel written by Ilyasah Shabazz was a book that I wanted to read as it had characters and a plot I could relate to my own personal experiences. I thoroughly enjoyed reading the book as I was able to learn more about social issues and broaden my horizons.

Inductive reasoning is a probabilistic reasoning in which the main claim concerns the improbability of the conclusion being false given the premises being true. Premises of an inductive argument do not entail the conclusion.

“Esse est percipi”. To be is to perceive, and to exist and to be perceived are one and the same. In the philosophical work of “A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge”, this one of the most famous principles which made Bishop George Berkeley one of the early modern period’s most acclaimed polymaths. Berkeley was a Bishop closely affiliated to the Anglican Church and a staunch critic of other philosophers of the past such as Rene Descartes and John Locke. Though initially impressed by their rigorous rhetoric, he could not bring himself to accept their views which were against his fundamental beliefs and which he viewed as flawed, leaning towards skepticism and atheism, two forces of the time which he was not fond of. Following his studies and extensive travels thereafter, his philosophy gradually developed. Berkley refuted the answers proposed by his predecessors, instead, advocating for pursuing concepts such as common sense and learning directly from what experience provided through the senses. Famously known to be a stalwart defender of the notion of “idealism”, or the view that reality consists exclusively of the mind, the spirit and its ideas, he promoted the belief of independent beings which were able to circumvent commonly held rationale to explain the unexplainable. Berkeley emphasized that given the acquaintance with our perceptions, the material world consequently was a mere representation of our spirits. In other words, no substance or permanence

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

Similar to critical thinking, the method of rational thinking interprets how we think rationally. Logic plays a specialized role in rational thinking. Rational thinking