Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
[4] Logical reasoning is rigorous in the sense that it does not generate any conclusion but ensures that the premises support the conclusion and act as reasons for believing it. [5] [6] One central aspect is that this support is not restricted to a specific reasoner but that any rational person would find the conclusion convincing based on the ...
The adage was a submission credited in print to Ronald M. Hanlon of Bronx, New York , in a compilation of various jokes related to Murphy's law published in Arthur Bloch's Murphy's Law Book Two: More Reasons Why Things Go Wrong! (1980). [1] A similar quotation appears in Robert A. Heinlein's novella Logic of Empire (1941). [2]
Some philosophers (one being John Broome [5]) view normative reasons as the same as "explanations of ought facts".Just as explanatory reasons explain why some descriptive fact obtains (or came to obtain), normative reasons on this view explain why some normative facts obtain, i.e., they explain why some state of affairs ought to come to obtain (e.g., why someone should act or why some event ...
When dividing 26 by 4, 6 is the quotient and 2 is the remainder, because 26 = 6 × 4 + 2. −42 = 9 × (−5) + 3 An alternative to × is the dot operator ⋅ (also encoded < math > \cdot </ math > and reachable in the "Math and logic" drop-down list below the edit box or via template {{ sdot }} ), which produces a symmetrically spaced ...
In propositional logic, modus tollens (/ ˈ m oʊ d ə s ˈ t ɒ l ɛ n z /) (MT), also known as modus tollendo tollens (Latin for "mode that by denying denies") [2] and denying the consequent, [3] is a deductive argument form and a rule of inference.
It is an attempt to find reasons for behaviors, especially one's own. [2] Rationalizations are used to defend against feelings of guilt, maintain self-respect, and protect oneself from criticism. Rationalization happens in two steps: A decision, action, judgement is made for a given reason, or no (known) reason at all.
Five whys (or 5 whys) is an iterative interrogative technique used to explore the cause-and-effect relationships underlying a particular problem. [1] The primary goal of the technique is to determine the root cause of a defect or problem by repeating the question "why?" five times, each time directing the current "why" to the answer of the ...
The modern [1] formulation of the principle is usually ascribed to early Enlightenment philosopher Gottfried Leibniz.Leibniz formulated it, but was not an originator. [2] The idea was conceived of and utilized by various philosophers who preceded him, including Anaximander, [3] Parmenides, Archimedes, [4] Plato and Aristotle, [5] Cicero, [5] Avicenna, [6] Thomas Aquinas, and Spinoza. [7]