 Induction is the process of drawing a general conclusion from incomplete evidence.  You consider evidence you have seen or heard to draw a conclusion.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Basics of Logical Argument Two Kinds of Argument The Deductive argument: true premises guarantee a true conclusion. e.g. All men are mortal. Socrates.
Advertisements

Basic Terms in Logic Michael Jhon M. Tamayao.
KEY TERMS Argument: A conclusion together with the premises that support it. Premise: A reason offered as support for another claim. Conclusion: A claim.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
{ Introduction to Logic The two types of logos. Induction  Definition: compiling of evidence/reasons/ examples that support an argument  Example: “Wow!
Logic and Reasoning Panther Prep North Central High School.
Debate. Inductive Reasoning When you start with a probable truth, and seek evidence to support it. Most scientific theories are inductive. Evidence is.
Logos Formal Logic.
The Three Appeals of Argument
LogicandEvidence Scientific argument. Logic Reasoning –Deductive –Inductive.
Deduction CIS308 Dr Harry Erwin. Syllogism A syllogism consists of three parts: the major premise, the minor premise, and the conclusion. In Aristotle,
Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-08: 1 Critical Issues in Information Systems BUSS 951 Seminar 8 Arguments.
Building Logical Arguments. Critical Thinking Skills Understand and use principles of scientific investigation Apply rules of formal and informal logic.
Introduction to Social Science Research
Debate. Inductive Reasoning When you start with a probable truth, and seek evidence to support it. Most scientific theories are inductive. Evidence is.
Basic Argumentation.
Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning. Objectives Use a Venn diagram to determine the validity of an argument. Complete a pattern with the most likely possible.
Deductive and Inductive Reasoning
Logic is the study of the principles of correct reasoning associated with the formation and analysis of arguments.
9/20/12 BR- Who are the 3 Argument Brothers (from yesterday) Today: How to Argue (Part 1) MIKVA!!
Logic in Everyday Life.
10/20/09 BR- Who are the three “brothers” of Argument? Today: Constructing A Logical Argument – Deductive and Inductive Reasoning -Hand in “facts” -MIKVA.
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.
Ways of Knowing: Reason Reason. Cogito ergo sum Reasoning Deductive Inductive.
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.
Theory of Knowledge Ms. Bauer
DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions from.
Philosophical Method  Logic: A Calculus For Good Reason  Clarification, Not Obfuscation  Distinctions and Disambiguation  Examples and Counterexamples.
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
PHIL 2525 Contemporary Moral Issues Lec 2 Arguments are among us…
Logic and Reasoning.
Understanding the Persuasive Techniques in Developing Arguments How a speech can soothe and inspire a grieving population.
1 How to learn and How to teach the Law Studying Law Teaching Law Teaching is Learning Conclusion KAGAYAMA Shigeru Professor emeritus of Nagoya University.
09/17/07 BR- What is “logic?” What does it mean to make a logical argument? Today: Logic and How to Argue (Part 1)
Deductive Reasoning. Deductive reasoning The process of logical reasoning from general principles to specific instances based on the assumed truth of.
Deductive and Inductive Reasoning
PROPOSALS LESSON #17. WRITING TIP OF THE DAY – CAPITALS For proper nouns (names of people, places, publications, titles, etc.), always capitalize the.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Terry C. Norris Fall Overview Types o With research  Evidence from outside, authoritative sources  Sources cited within the paper and on the Works.
METHODS OF PERSUASION Chapter 16. Credibility Ethos – the word that Aristotle used to describe what we now think of as a speaker’s credibility Credibility.
Deductive Reasoning. Inductive: premise offers support and evidenceInductive: premise offers support and evidence Deductive: premises offers proof that.
Do now Can you make sure that you have finished your Venn diagrams from last lesson. Can you name 5 famous mathematicians (including one that is still.
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 vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Deductive reasoning.
Introduction to Research Methodology
Chapter 1: Good and Bad Reasoning
Deductive Arguments.
Deductive and Inductive REASONING
Deductive Logic, Categorical Syllogism
10/28/09 BR- What is the most important factor in winning an argument
Argumentation and Persuasion
Introduction to Research Methodology
Win Every Argument Every Time
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
2.4 Deductive Reasoning.
Reasoning, Logic, and Position Statements
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Arguments.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
DEDUCTIVE REASONING Forensic Science.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.
Principles of Argument
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
“Kritikos” To question, to make sense of, to analyze.
Logical Fallacies.
The Persuasive Speech Ch. 24.
Tenets to Argumentation
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Presentation transcript:

 Induction is the process of drawing a general conclusion from incomplete evidence.  You consider evidence you have seen or heard to draw a conclusion about things you haven’t seen or heard  The intellectual movement from limited facts (a sample) to a general conviction is called an inductive leap

 For a claim to be credible the sample must be: 1.Known 2.Suffiecient 3. representative

 Occam’s Razor: the maxim that when a body of evidence exists, the simplest conclusion that expresses all of it is probably the best.  Maxim: 1. a general truth, fundamental principle, or rule of conduct

 Opposite of induction  Deduction moves from a general truth to a specific example  Vehicle of deduction is the syllogism

 This is an argument that takes 2 existing truths(premise) and puts them together to create a new truth  Classic Example:  MAJOR PREMISE: All men are mortal  MINOR PREMISE: Socrates is a man  CONCLUSION: Socrates is mortal

1. The premises must be true 2. The terms must be unambiguous 3. The syllogistic form must be valid

 Premises in a syllogism must be true  Major premise is derived from induction  Minor premise is derived from using the 5 senses (taste, touch, hear, smell, see)

 The terms of a deductive argument must be clear and consistent  If definitions change within a syllogism, arguments can become fallacious