DEDUCTIVE & INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Basic Terms in Logic Michael Jhon M. Tamayao.
Advertisements

Types of Arguments Inductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to prove that the conclusion is probably true. Strong.
Deduction and Induction Elementary deduction, my dear Watson…
Chapter 1 Critical Thinking.
The Problem of Induction Reading: ‘The Problem of Induction’ by W. Salmon.
Other Info on Making Arguments
Intro to Logic: the tools of the trade You need to be able to: Recognize an argument when you see one (in media, articles, people’s claims). Organize arguments.
Deduction and Induction
Reasoning Automated Deduction. Reasonable Arguments Argument: An attempt to demonstrate the truth of a conclusion from the truth of a set of premises.
For Friday, read chapter 2, sections 1-2 (pp ). As nongraded homework, do the problems on p. 19. Graded homework #1 is due at the beginning of class.
BASIC CONCEPTS OF ARGUMENTS
1 Arguments in Philosophy Introduction to Philosophy.
Part 2 Module 3 Arguments and deductive reasoning Logic is a formal study of the process of reasoning, or using common sense. Deductive reasoning involves.
Basic Argumentation.
Copyright © 2015, 2011, 2008 Pearson Education, Inc. Chapter 1, Unit 1D, Slide 1 Thinking Critically 1.
GLE Explore the concept of premises, including false premises. Intro to Logic.
0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) December 23, 2005.
FALSE PREMISE.
9/20/12 BR- Who are the 3 Argument Brothers (from yesterday) Today: How to Argue (Part 1) MIKVA!!
Logic in Everyday Life.
Reasoning and Critical Thinking Validity and Soundness 1.
Question of the Day!  We shared a lot of examples of illogical arguments!  But how do you make a LOGICAL argument? What does your argument need? What.
Chapter 3: MAKING SENSE OF ARGUMENTS
Argument Diagramming Part II PHIL 121: Methods of Reasoning February 1, 2013 Instructor:Karin Howe Binghamton University.
2.8 Methods of Proof PHIL 012 1/26/2001.
Aerospace Engineering Laboratory I
10/21/09 BR- Identify the (1)premises and the (2)conclusion in the following deductive argument. Is it valid or invalid? All fish need gills to breath.
0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) All dogs have two heads. 2. All tigers are dogs. ___________________________________ 3. All tigers have two.
DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions from.
Critical Thinking. Critical thinkers use reasons to back up their claims. What is a claim? ◦ A claim is a statement that is either true or false. It must.
Today’s Topics Introduction to Proofs Rules of Inference Rules of Equivalence.
DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. PROBLEM SOLVING Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.
The construction of a formal argument
Propositions and Arguments. What is a proposition? A proposition is a predicative sentence that only contains a subject and a predicate S is P.
09/17/07 BR- What is “logic?” What does it mean to make a logical argument? Today: Logic and How to Argue (Part 1)
What is an argument? An argument is, to quote the Monty Python sketch, "a connected series of statements to establish a definite proposition." Huh? Three.
Part One: Assessing the Inference, Deductive and Inductive Reasoning.
Chapter 7: Induction.
Types of Arguments Inductive Argument: An argument in which the truth of the premises is supposed to prove that the conclusion is probably true. Strong.
09/17/08 BR- Identify the premises and the conclusion in the following deductive argument. Is it valid or invalid? All fish need gills to breath water.
Deductive reasoning.
Chapter 3 Basic Logical Concepts (Please read book.)
WEEK 3 VALIDITY OF ARGUMENTS Valid argument: A deductive argument is valid if its conclusion is necessarily and logically drawn from the premises. The.
FALSE PREMISE.
Inductive / Deductive reasoning
10/28/09 BR- What is the most important factor in winning an argument
Chapter 3 Philosophy: Questions and theories
Introduction to Logic PHIL 240 Sections
The Ontological Argument
Validity and Soundness
Reasoning, Logic, and Position Statements
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Arguments.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
The Ontological Argument
Distinguish valid from invalid arguments and sound from unsound
Making Sense of Arguments
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Logical Fallacies.
Syllogisms and Enthymemes.
SUMMARY Logic and Reasoning.
Patterns of Informal Non-Deductive Logic (Ch. 6)
Propositional Logic 1) Introduction Copyright 2008, Scott Gray.
ID1050– Quantitative & Qualitative Reasoning
Evaluating Deductive Arguments
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Validity and Soundness, Again
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
Presentation transcript:

DEDUCTIVE & INDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS

Deductive Arguments

Deductive Arguments For a deductive argument, if all its premises are true, its conclusion is necessarily true (or it is logically impossible for the conclusion to be false.) I.e., the truth of premises guarantees the truth of conclusion. E.g.: Either you work hard or you will fail the test. You do not work hard. Therefore, you will fail the test.

3 Types of Possibility Technological possibility Physical possibility e.g., Going to the moon is technological possible, but going to Mercury is not. Physical possibility e.g., Going to Mercury is physical possible, but making water boil at 95 C under one atmospheric pressure is not. Logical possibility e.g. Making water boil at 95 C under one atmospheric pressure is logical possible, but drawing a triangle with 4 angles is not.

Deductive Arguments When we talk about deductive arguments, we have already presupposed that the arguments are successful or valid deductive arguments. The conclusion of a valid argument is called a valid conclusion.

Deductive Arguments For an unsuccessful deductive argument (the premises are intended to guarantee the conclusion but fail to do so), we call it an invalid argument. A deductive argument may be valid or invalid, there is nothing in between.

Deductive Arguments Whether a deductive argument is valid or invalid depends on its form or structure, not on its content. The above argument is valid because it has this valid form: p or q. Not-p. Therefore, q. p and q are statement variables. A letter represents a term.

Deductive Arguments Any argument having that form will also be a valid argument. There are infinite possible valid structures. Here are some common examples: If p, then q p____  q Not-q____  Not-p

Here are more examples: If p, then q If q, then r  If p, then r If p and q, then r p_____________  If q, then r

Deductive Arguments A valid argument may have false conclusion if it has false premises. E.g.: CY Leung is either a genius or an idiot. He is not an idiot. Therefore, He is a genius.

Deductive Arguments In order to guarantee the truth of conclusion, we have to make sure all the premises are true. When all the premises of a valid argument are true, the argument is called a “sound argument”. And the conclusion of a sound argument is called a sound conclusion. If an argument is invalid or has false premises, it is unsound.

Deductive Arguments On the other hand, the fact that an argument is invalid does not entail that its conclusion is false. It just means that its conclusion does not follow from its premises. You can consider a valid argument structure as a truth-keeping machine: When you input T information into it, it will output T information. When you input F information into it, it will output T or F information.

Inductive Arguments

A typical example of inductive argument: Swan1 is white. Swan2 is white. Swan3 is white. … Swann is white. ________________ All swans are white.

Another typical example: An event of type B follows an event of type A at time t1. An event of type B follows an event of type A at time t2. … An event of type B follows an event of type A at time tn. ___________________________ A causes B.

Many people think that the characteristic of inductive arguments is arguing from particular to general. However, deductive arguments may also argue from particular to general, e.g.: I have two cats, Fluffy and Garfield. Fluffy does not eat fish. Garfield does not eat fish either._____ Therefore, All of my cats do not eat fish.

Some inductive arguments may argue from general to particular, e.g.: Most of our students are born in HK. Jim is one of our students. Therefore, Jim is born in HK.

Inductive Argument The main difference between deductive arguments and inductive arguments is that, for the latter, if all its premises are true, its conclusion is likely to be true but still possible to be false I.e., The truth of its premises makes it reasonable to hold that the conclusion is true but the content of the premises does not include (imply) the content of the conclusion.

Inductive Argument We call a good inductive argument a strong argument, a bad inductive argument a weak argument. Whether an inductive argument is strong or weak depends on its content, not on its structure.

Inductive Argument These 2 arguments have the same structure but one is strong and the other is weak: HK is a wealthy society. Therefore, most of HK people are wealthy. HK is a Chinese society. Therefore, most of HK people are Chinese.

Inductive Argument Even for a strong argument, if its premises are false, we still have no reasons to believe in the conclusion. If all the premises of a strong argument are true, the argument is called a “cogent argument.” The conclusion is called a “cogent conclusion.” If an argument is weak or has false premises, it is uncogent.

Composite Arguments

If an argument is made up of two deductive sub-arguments, the whole argument is still a deductive argument.

Example: Either you work hard or you will fail the exam. You do not work hard. So, you will fail the exam. (Sub-conclusion) If you fail the exam, you need to retake the course. Therefore, you need to retake the course.

If an argument consists of a deductive sub-argument and an inductive sub-argument, the whole argument is an inductive argument.

Example: Either you have enough sleep or you will feel sleepy in class. You do not have enough sleep. So, you will feel sleepy in class. (Sub-conclusion) Most students who feel sleepy in class have poor grades. Therefore, you will have poor grades.