0
Assuming there are premises based on correct observations and sound logic which is more certain of resulting in a conclusion that's correct?
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Deductive reasoning
Wiki User
∙ 14y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Describe a conclusion reached from observations?
A "conjecture" is a conclusion reached simply from observations...this is a process known as "inductive reasoning". An example would be a weather forecast. The difference between "inductive reasoning" and "deductive reasoning" is that with deductive reasoning, the answer must "necessarily" follow from a set of premises. Inductive reasoning is the process by which you make a mathematical "hypothesis" given a set of observations
What is included with two premises in a syllogism?
A conclusion.
What the meaning of inductive?
Induction or inductive reasoning, sometimes called inductive logic, is the process of reasoning in which the premises of an argument are believed to support the conclusion but do not entail the premises; i.e. they do not ensure its truth. Induction is a form of reasoning that makes generalizations based on individual instances.[1] It is used to ascribe properties or relations to types based on an observation instance (i.e., on a number of observations or experiences); or to formulate laws based on limited observations of recurring phenomenal patterns.
What features of an argument make it inductive reasoning?
One AnswerInductive reasoning is a form of logical reasoning that begins with a particular argument and arrives at a universal logical conclusion. An example is when you first observe falling objects, and as a result, formulate a general operational law of gravity.A critical factor for identifying an argument based on inductive reasoning is the nature relationships among the premises underlying the propositions in an argument. Logical reasoning exists in an argument only when a premise or premises flow with logical necessity into the resulting conclusion. Hence, there is no sequence.The following is an example of an Inductive Argument:Premise 1. You know that a woman named Daffodil lives somewhere your building.Premise 2: Daffodil has a shrill voice.Premise 3. You hear a woman in the apartment next door yelling with a yelling with a shrill voice.Conclusion: It is likely that the woman fighting in the apartment is Daffodil.Note how the detailed premises logically flow together into the conclusion. This is the hallmark of inductive reasoning.Another AnswerI have heard of a mathematical proof that quantifies inductive reasoning through patterns in numbers, its called Occums Razor.Another AnswerThe information contained in the premises of an argument is supposed to provide evidence for its conclusion. In a good (valid) argument, they do; the conclusion follows logically from the premises. In a bad (invalid) argument, they do not.When the evidence provided by the premises is conclusive, or, minimally, supposed to be conclusive, the argument is a deductive one; otherwise, it is inductive.To use the metaphor of containment, in a valid deductive argument the information contained in its conclusion is always equal to or less than the information provided by its premises. For example, where 'p' stands for any proposition, the argument: "p, hence p" is valid (even though it's trivial). The information in the conclusion is obviously the same as the information in the premise. (In an actual case, this valid argument would be "sound" if the premise were true, and it would be valid but "unsound" if the premise were false.)By way of contrast, in an inductive argument, the information in the premises is always weaker than the information in the conclusion.For example, suppose that all the senators from a certain state have been male. Someone might argue that, since the first senator was male and since the second senator was male and since the third senator was male and so on, then the next senator will also be male. In this case, the information contained in the conclusion is not already contained in its premises (because its premises say nothing about the next senator). Is this, then, a successful argument?Obviously, it is not in the sense that there is a logical gap between the information contained in the premises and the information contained in the conclusion. On the other hand, some might argue that the premises provide some, but not conclusive, evidence of the truth of the conclusion. It might, in other words, be more likely that the next senator would be male, but that is not for certain.Therefore, in a deductive argument, the relevant evidence is, if true and the argument is valid, conclusive.However, in an inductive argument, the evidence provided by all the premises is never conclusive.CautionPeople often confuse inductive and deductive arguments. inductive arguments often reason from a set of particulars to a generality; deductive arguments often reason from a generality to a set of particulars. For example, if I see three robins (the bird, not Batman's sidekick) and they all have red breasts, then I can use inductive reasoning to say that all robins have red breasts (I start with what I've seen and make a general rule about it). Once I've made the rule that all robins have red breasts, then I can use deductive reasoning to say that the next robin I see will have a red breast (I start with a general rule and make a statement about a particular thing I will see).However, there are deductive arguments that move from general premises to general conclusions. Eg., All dogs are canines. All canines are mammals. Therefore, all dogs are mammals. And inductive arguments that move from particulars to particulars. Eg., These shoes are like the ones I bought last year at Zmart. The ones I bought last year are still wearable so these shoes are likely to be wearable too.
How many syllables does premises?
There are 3 syllables. Prem-i-ses.
Assuming there are premises based on correct observations and sound logic which is more certain of resulting in a conclusion thats correct?
Deductive reasoning
How do you add a premises and conclusion to incomplete argument?
To add a premises and conclusion to an incomplete argument, first identify the main point being made. Then, find additional supporting reasons or evidence that lead to that main point to form the premises. Finally, state a clear conclusion that follows logically from the premises provided. Make sure the premises adequately support the conclusion for a strong and coherent argument.
Describe a conclusion reached from observations?
A "conjecture" is a conclusion reached simply from observations...this is a process known as "inductive reasoning". An example would be a weather forecast. The difference between "inductive reasoning" and "deductive reasoning" is that with deductive reasoning, the answer must "necessarily" follow from a set of premises. Inductive reasoning is the process by which you make a mathematical "hypothesis" given a set of observations
A syllogism includes two premises and what else?
A syllogism includes two premises and a conclusion. The premises take the form of statement about classes of things and the conclusion is a similar statement which is necessarily implied by the premises.
Do the premises sufficiently support the conclusions?
This depends on the specific premises and conclusion being evaluated. In general, premises that provide strong and relevant evidence in support of the conclusion can be considered sufficient. However, if there are logical gaps or missing information in the premises that weaken the connection to the conclusion, then the premises may not be sufficient. Critical analysis is necessary to determine whether the premises adequately support the conclusion.
What is included with two premises in a syllogism?
A conclusion.
How do you identify a strong or weak argument?
A strong argument is supported by reasoning and evidence, is logically sound, and addresses counterarguments effectively. A weak argument lacks evidence, relies on emotion or fallacious reasoning, or fails to address opposing views adequately. It's important to evaluate the validity of the premises, the logical structure, and the relevance of the evidence when determining the strength of an argument.
A valid argument can have a false conclusion True or False?
True. A valid argument can have a false conclusion if the premises logically lead to that conclusion even though it is not true. Validity in logic refers to the structure of the argument, regardless of the truth or falsity of the premises or conclusion.
What is the act of drawing the wrong conclusion from two premises?
logic
Can an argument with a true premises and true conclusion be invalid?
Yes, an argument with true premises and a true conclusion can still be invalid if the conclusion does not logically follow from the premises. Invalidity concerns the structure of the argument rather than the truth of the statements involved.
What is the difference between valid and sound in a argument?
In logic, a valid argument is one where the conclusion logically follows from the premises. A sound argument is a valid argument with true premises. So, a sound argument is not only valid, but it also has true premises, making it both logically correct and factually accurate.
When these type of words are used in an argument they are indicator that the premises had been made and a conclusion will soon follow?
These types of words are called conclusion indicators. They signal to the listener or reader that the argument is reaching a conclusion based on the presented premises. Examples of conclusion indicators include "thus," "therefore," and "so".
