![]() But whether in error or malice, if either of the propositions above is wrong, then a policy decision based upon it ( California need never make plans to deal with a drought) probably would fail to serve the public interest.Īssuming the propositions are sound, the rather stern logic of deductive reasoning can give you absolutely certain conclusions. A syllogism like this is particularly insidious because it looks so very logical–it is, in fact, logical. A syllogism yields a false conclusion if either of its propositions is false. In the example above, though the inferential process itself is valid, the conclusion is false because the premise, There is no such thing as drought in the West, is false. There is no such thing as drought in the West.Ĭalifornia need never make plans to deal with a drought. ![]() The inferential process can be valid even if the premise is false: ![]() At the same time, independent of the truth or falsity of the premises, the deductive inference itself (the process of "connecting the dots" from premise to conclusion) is either valid or invalid. Here is another example:Ī medical technology ought to be funded if it has been used successfully to treat patients.Īdult stem cells are being used to treat patients successfully in more than sixty-five new therapies.Īdult stem cell research and technology should be funded.Ī conclusion is sound (true) or unsound (false), depending on the truth of the original premises (for any premise may be true or false). In the syllogism above, the first two statements, the propositions or premises, lead logically to the third statement, the conclusion. Then disorder will increase in my living room unless I clean it. If entropy (disorder) in a system will increase unless energy is expended, But a deductive syllogism (think of it as a plain-English version of a math equality) can be expressed in ordinary language: As a matter of fact, formal, symbolic logic uses a language that looks rather like the math equality above, complete with its own operators and syntax. In this example, it is a logical necessity that 2x + y equals 9 2x + y must equal 9. Deductive reasoning moves from the general rule to the specific application: In deductive reasoning, if the original assertions are true, then the conclusion must also be true. Three methods of reasoning are the deductive, inductive, and abductive approaches.ĭeductive reasoning: conclusion guaranteedĭeductive reasoning starts with the assertion of a general rule and proceeds from there to a guaranteed specific conclusion. ![]() Reasoning is the process of using existing knowledge to draw conclusions, make predictions, or construct explanations. DEDUCTIVE, INDUCTIVE, AND ABDUCTIVE REASONING ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |