Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Inductive reasoning is any of various methods of reasoning in which broad generalizations or principles are derived from a body of observations. [1] [2] This article is concerned with the inductive reasoning other than deductive reasoning (such as mathematical induction), where the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, given the premises are correct; in contrast, the truth of the ...
But even arguments that are not deductively valid may still be good arguments because their premises offer non-deductive support to their conclusions. For such cases, the term ampliative or inductive reasoning is used. [63] Deductive arguments are associated with formal logic in contrast to the relation between ampliative arguments and informal ...
Defeasible reasoning – Reasoning that is rationally compelling, though not deductively valid – from authority: if p then (defeasibly) q; Diagrammatic reasoning – reasoning by the mean of visual representations – reasoning by means of visual representations. Visualizing concepts and ideas with of diagrams and imagery instead of by ...
While deductive logic allows one to arrive at a conclusion with certainty, inductive logic can only provide a conclusion that is probably true. [non-primary source needed] It is mistaken to frame the difference between deductive and inductive logic as one between general to specific reasoning and specific to general reasoning. This is a common ...
As such, and as al-Sadr puts it in his introduction, there is a "gap" in inductive reasoning. This is since while deductive reasoning is justified by the law of noncontradiction, induction lacks this justification. Al-Sadr aims in this book to close this "gap", and provide the missing justification for inductive reasoning.
An argument is a series of sentences, statements, or propositions some of which are called premises and one is the conclusion. [1] The purpose of an argument is to give reasons for one's conclusion via justification, explanation, and/or persuasion.
Argument from analogy is a special type of inductive argument, where perceived similarities are used as a basis to infer some further similarity that has not been observed yet. Analogical reasoning is one of the most common methods by which human beings try to understand the world and make decisions. [ 1 ]
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).