0
Want this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
How is inductive reasoning different from deductive reasoning?
Inductive reasoning varies from deductive reasoning as follows: 1) inductive reasoning is a reason supporting an argument and 2) deductive reasoning is an argument against an argument.
What is the verb of demonstrate?
Demonstrate is a verb - to establish by argument or reasoning
What is the purpose of logical argument?
ar·gu·ment, A course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating truth or falsehood: log·i·cal Reasoning or capable of reasoning in a clear and consistent manner. logical argument- a course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating a truth or falsehood; the methodical process of logical reasoning; Thesaurus.By it's definition, it's to separate truth from falsehood or fiction.
What type of reasoning does a mathematical proof use?
Deductive reasoning In mathematics, a proof is a deductive argument for a mathematical statement. Deductive reasoning, unlike inductive reasoning, is a valid form of proof. It is, in fact, the way in which geometric proofs are written.
Why do people use fallacies?
to make you think you are making strong argument but engaged in flawed reasoning
What is abductive reasoning?
Abductive reasoning is the determination of the plausibility of an action based upon supplied evidence.
What type of reasoning was used in the developoment of evolution theory?
Abductive and inductive reasoning, as in all the natural sciences.
How is inductive reasoning different from deductive reasoning?
Inductive reasoning varies from deductive reasoning as follows: 1) inductive reasoning is a reason supporting an argument and 2) deductive reasoning is an argument against an argument.
What are the three skills scientists use to learn about the world?
The two biggest ones are critical thinking and the power of observation. There is also deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning, which include inference and predicting.
What is a fallacious argument?
An argument that sometimes fools human reasoning, but is not logically valid.
An argument uses unsound reasoning?
fallacious
What if an argument does not commit a fallacy?
If an argument does not commit a fallacy, it does not necessarily mean that the argument is sound. A fallacy is an argument that uses poor reasoning.
What is an example Abductive reasoning?
Abductive reasoning is very common (usually in extraterrestrial species). This is when a person or alien has difficultly reasoning logically reasoning things and usually ends up turning to abduction. One example using a human: an overweight middle aged man leaves a fast food restaurant and goes to throw his trash away but a piece falls out. Instead of bending over and picking it up, he decides to be lazy and tell Mother Earth that she can kiss his trash. He turns and sees a little 8 year old girl has witnessed the whole incident and is going to tell her parents of his offense. He has to stop this girl from releasing his sin. He could have asked her politely not to repeat this situation, but instead he uses abductive reasoning and takes the little girl back to his apartment (aka abducting) where she can't spread bad talk about him. Another example using an alien: a few aliens are cruising around one night and decide to pay Earth a little visit for the fun of it. They stop in the middle of a field of crops somewhere and decide to do some vandalism and screw the farmer over for the year by making crop circles. Right in the middle of this act, the farmer comes out with his pitchfork and a camera. At this point, the aliens could have taken the farmer's camera and erased his memory, but instead they used abductive reasoning and took the farmer into their spaceship (aka abducting) and deciding to do some experiments on him while they were at it. As you can see, abductive reasoning isn't the healthiest or best way to reason out situations, but in the end a decision is made and that is what truly counts.
What is an argument from design?
An argument from design is a theological term for a teleological argument - an argument for the existence of God, such that because nature is orderly, it is evidence of a designer.
What does it mean if an argument has logical fallacies?
it has faulty reasoning
Is the design argument a convincing argument?
yes
What is the part of an argument that is flawed and makes the argument invalid an error in reasoning?
That would be a moot point
