PPT-Use Inductive Reasoning Objectives
Author : alexa-scheidler | Published Date : 2018-10-13
To form conjectures through inductive reasoning To disprove a conjecture with a counterexample To avoid fallacies of inductive reasoning Example 1 Youre at school
Presentation Embed Code
Download Presentation
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Use Inductive Reasoning Objectives" is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this website for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Use Inductive Reasoning Objectives: Transcript
To form conjectures through inductive reasoning To disprove a conjecture with a counterexample To avoid fallacies of inductive reasoning Example 1 Youre at school eating lunch You ingest some air while eating which causes you to belch Afterward you notice a number of students staring at you with disgust You burp again and looks of distaste greet your natural bodily function You have similar experiences over the course of the next couple of days Finally you conclude that belching in public is socially unacceptable The process that lead you to this conclusion is called. - Charles Sanders Peirce. Using Models of Reasoning. A Return to Logos. Reasoning from Specific Instances. Progressing from a number of particular facts to a general conclusion. .. This is also known as inductive reasoning.. A. rgue . S. uccessfully. Deductive and Inductive Reasoning. Introduction. “Logic has been a formal academic discipline for . almost 2,500 years. For much of western history, logic was one of the main branches of schooling (the classical curriculum consisted of grammar, logic and rhetoric - Language used to persuade or influence others). With the growth of more specialized disciplines and wider curricula in the 20th century, formal logic got lost in the shuffle. In its place, philosophers began formulating courses in what we now call critical thinking, or informal logic.” (FactCheckEd.org, 2008). 3. August . 25, . 2015. (1.2 in your . books – pre-quiz today). Meme Moment. Scientist of the Day. Chris Hadfield. Saw the Apollo 11 moon landing when he was 9 and decided to be an astronaut. Test pilot. Arguments. Premise: . statement upon which an argument is based or from which a conclusion is drawn. Premise is either true or false. Arguments: . Consist of one or more premises and one conclusion or claim, which is drawn from those premises. . Summer 2009. 1. THE inductive Bible Study method. 2. How and Why to Read Books. The Bible is a special book. Divinely inspired, living and active. Studying literature vs. studying the Bible. English Scholars have many methods and can have many purposes for interpretation. Argument. Monty Python – Argument Clinic video. Monty Python. Premises + Conclusion = Argument. Argument – a group of statements including one or more premises and a conclusion. Premise – a statement in an argument that provides reason or support for the conclusion. Sub; legal method and legal reasoning. NITIN RANA. PARIKSHIT GAUR. PURNENDU . PuLKITPAL. . SINGH. RISHAB RAJ. RITIKA GAUTAM. Group MEMBERS ARE -. Deductive reasoning is sometimes referred to as top-down logic. Its counterpart, inductive reasoning, is sometimes referred to as bottom-up logic. Where deductive reasoning proceeds from general premises to a specific conclusion, inductive reasoning proceeds from specific premises to a general conclusion. . The other side of logic. Deduction . vs. Induction. Deduction – General to Specific. Induction – Specific to General. Inductive reasoning. Uses particular facts, common threads and ideas to draw a conclusion suggested by evidence. Ch. 2.1. Inductive Reasoning. - uses a number of specific examples to arrive at a conclusion.. used . in applications that involve prediction, forecasting, or . behavior . derived . using facts and instances which lead to the formation of a general . Inductive Reasoning . When you use a pattern to find the next term in a sequence you’re using . inductive reasoning.. The conclusion you’ve made about the next terms in the pattern are called a . Induction vs Deduction. Fogelin. and . Sinnott. -Armstrong describe the difference between induction and deduction as follows:. Deductive arguments are intended to be valid. Inductive arguments are not intended to be valid but still to provide a reason for the conclusion. Mimi . Opkins. CECS 100. Fall 2011. Problem Solving. Logic. – The science of correct reasoning.. Reasoning. – The drawing of inferences or conclusions from known or assumed facts.. When solving a problem, one must understand the question, gather all pertinent facts, analyze the problem i.e. compare with previous problems (note similarities and differences), perhaps use pictures or formulas to solve the problem.. Basic APA Style. Reky Groendal. Resources. APA Manual Sixth Edition. http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/10/. http://www.lib.monash.edu.au/tutorials/citing/apa.html. http://flash1r.apa.org/apastyle/basics/index.htm. To form conjectures through inductive reasoning. To disprove a conjecture with a counterexample. To avoid fallacies of inductive reasoning. Example 1. You’re at school eating lunch. You ingest some air while eating, which causes you to belch. Afterward, you notice a number of students staring at you with disgust. You burp again, and looks of distaste greet your natural bodily function. You have similar experiences over the course of the next couple of days. Finally, you conclude that belching in public is socially unacceptable. The process that lead you to this conclusion is called.
Download Document
Here is the link to download the presentation.
"Use Inductive Reasoning Objectives"The content belongs to its owner. You may download and print it for personal use, without modification, and keep all copyright notices. By downloading, you agree to these terms.
Related Documents