Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Logical reasoning is a mental activity that aims to arrive at a conclusion in a rigorous way. It happens in the form of inferences or arguments by starting from a set of premises and reasoning to a conclusion supported by these premises. The premises and the conclusion are propositions, i.e. true or false claims about what is the case. Together ...
Unsubstantiated claims, which lack specific evidence, involve some common fallacies, which can mislead other editors into false conclusions. Some common fallacies of baseless claims include: Begging the question - asserting a claim as if true but without proof; Argumentum ad nauseam - repeating remarks, typically with "walls of text" which lack ...
An argument map or argument diagram is a visual representation of the structure of an argument.An argument map typically includes all the key components of the argument, traditionally called the conclusion and the premises, also called contention and reasons. [1]
Logic studies arguments, which consist of a set of premises that leads to a conclusion. An example is the argument from the premises "it's Sunday" and "if it's Sunday then I don't have to work" leading to the conclusion "I don't have to work". [1] Premises and conclusions express propositions or claims that can be true or false. An important ...
Inferences are steps in logical reasoning, moving from premises to logical consequences; etymologically, the word infer means to "carry forward". Inference is theoretically traditionally divided into deduction and induction, a distinction that in Europe dates at least to Aristotle (300s BCE).
Reductio ad absurdum, painting by John Pettie exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1884. In logic, reductio ad absurdum (Latin for "reduction to absurdity"), also known as argumentum ad absurdum (Latin for "argument to absurdity") or apagogical arguments, is the form of argument that attempts to establish a claim by showing that the opposite scenario would lead to absurdity or contradiction.
Plausible reasoning is based on the way things generally go in familiar situations. Plausible reasoning can be used to fill in implicit premises in incomplete arguments. Plausible reasoning is commonly based on appearances from perception. Stability is an important characteristic of plausible reasoning.
An inductive argument affirms, not that a certain matter of fact is so, but that relative to certain evidence there is a probability in its favour. The validity of the induction, relative to the original evidence, is not upset, therefore, if, as a fact, the truth turns out to be otherwise. [20] This approach was endorsed by Bertrand Russell. [21]