Ads
related to: example of a logical argument speech therapy
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Socratic method (also known as the method of Elenchus or Socratic debate) is a form of argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions. Socratic dialogues feature in many of the works of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato , where his teacher Socrates debates various philosophical issues with an ...
Logical arguments are simple chains of statements people make to explain something they believe or notice about themselves, other people or the world at large. Life is full of logical arguments ...
Logical reasoning is a form of thinking that is concerned with arriving at a conclusion in a rigorous way. [1] This happens in the form of inferences by transforming the information present in a set of premises to reach a conclusion.
Example of an early argument map, from Richard Whately's Elements of Logic (1852 edition). Argumentation theory is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be supported or undermined by premises through logical reasoning.
Argumentation schemes are stereotypical patterns of inference, combining semantic-ontological relations with types of reasoning and logical axioms and representing the abstract structure of the most common types of natural arguments. [13] A typical example is the argument from expert opinion, shown below, which has two premises and a conclusion ...
Logic-based therapy (LBT) is a modality of philosophical counseling developed by philosopher Elliot D. Cohen beginning in the mid-1980s. It is a philosophical variant of rational emotive behavior therapy (REBT), which was developed by psychologist Albert Ellis .
Rational argument reflects knowledge and understanding, and how the case is made. These qualities determine whether the argument is accepted, so long as the form matches the forum, which might be scientific, legal, philosophical, etc. The world is a set of logical puzzles that can be solved through reason. [13]
An appeal to nature is a rhetorical technique for presenting and proposing the argument that "a thing is good because it is 'natural', or bad because it is 'unnatural'." [1] In debate and discussion, an appeal-to-nature argument can be considered to be a bad argument, because the implicit primary premise "What is natural is good" has no factual meaning beyond rhetoric in some or most contexts.