90 likes | 193 Views
Who doesn’t love logic?. Inductive and deductive reasoning All information can be found on 467-476 in your textbook. This thought process starts with observing small details (evidence) and using that evidence to form an inductive leap (a hypothesis or generalization).
E N D
Who doesn’t love logic? Inductive and deductive reasoning All information can be found on 467-476 in your textbook.
This thought process starts with observing small details (evidence) and using that evidence to form an inductive leap (a hypothesis or generalization). • Example: evid 1: I have a fever. evid 2: I keep sneezing. Conclusion: I am sick. Inductive Reasoning
Several people were mugged last night while shopping in town (evidence). • Several homes and apartments were burglarized in the past few weeks. (evidence) • Several cars were stolen from people’s driveways. • The police hasn’t protected the town. (conclusion or inductive leap) Example from your book:
You cannot 100% rule out other possible conclusions. • For example, maybe it isn’t the police’s fault. Maybe individuals were making careless or risky decisions with their property. Be careful with inductive leaps
Starts with a broad conclusion. • Narrows generalization to a concise point. • Opposite of inductive reasoning. • Three logical parts are required to use deductive reasoning: 1. major premise 2. minor premise 3. conclusion. Deductive Reasoning
Major Premise: Space programs in the past have led to important developments in technology, especially in medical science. • Minor premise: The Cosmos Mission is the newest program. • Conclusion: The Cosmos Mission will likely lead to developments in medical science. • Conclusion: Congress should continue funding the Cosmos Mission.
Major Premise: Students who plagiarize papers must appear before the Faculty Committee on Academic Policies and Procedures. • Minor Premise: Yesterday, Jennifer, the president of the student government appeared before the Committee. • Conclusion: Jennifer plagiarized a paper. • Action: Jennifer must resign. (WTH?) Be careful of making a faulty conclusion
Claim: thesis, action, or conclusion. • Data/Reason: the evidence (facts, stats., observations, etc.) • Warrant: underlying assumption between the claim and reason. Toulmin Logic
Data/Reason: The train engineer was under the influence of drugs when the train crashed. • Claim: Transportation employees entrusted with the public’s safety should be tested for drug use. • Warrant: Transportation employees entrusted with the public safety should not be allowed to work stoned. Toulmin Example