I am putting five arguments,
1. My brother is unemployed.
2. He is graduate but not competent to take clerical task.
3. I am a owner of the firm engaged in placing people.
4. The firm has vacancy for graduate clerks.
5. When my brother applied for the clerical position,
I have used deductive reasoning to take judgment, whether to employ him in my firm or not.
Ans: 1. To ensure benefit of the firm I have rejected his candidature.
2. To maintain my relation and his wellbeing, I have accepted his candidature.
Inductive Reasoning: All dogs bark -> Snoopy is a dog -> Snoopy Barks xD
Deductive Reasoning: All Oranges are fruits -> all fruits grow on trees -> all oranges grow on trees
(i got the first example from my dog Snoopyx3)
Every body, who is born will die, eventually.
I am born.
So I will die, eventually.
Every doctor is a graduate.I am a doctor.
So I am a graduate.
kill yourself
Both are equally important. Inductive reasoning is when one makes a conclusion based on patterns; deductive reasoning is based on a hypothesis already believed to be true. However, deductive reasoning does give a more "solid" conclusion because as long as the hypothesis is true, the conclusion will most likely to be true. An example is saying that all dogs are big; Harry is a dog, so it must be big. Since the hypothesis all dogs are big is false, Harry may not necessarily be big. If I change my hypothesis to be all dogs are mammals, thus concluding that Harry is a mammal since it is a dog, I would be correct, for I changed my hypothesis to a true fact. Using inductive reasoning, on the other hand, may result in a false conclusion. For example, since I am a human and I have brown hair, one could use inductive reasoning to say all humans have brown hair, which would be false. So, to sum it up, both inductive and deductive reasoning are important, but deductive reasoning is usually more reliable since as long as the hypothesis one's conclusion is based on is true, the conclusion itself will usually be true.
No, an inductive argument cannot be changed into a deductive argument because they are fundamentally different types of reasoning. Inductive arguments rely on probability and generalizations to support their conclusions, while deductive arguments rely on logic and specific premises to guarantee their conclusions.
Inductive reasoning is when someone provides strong evidence to the truth of something. An example would be showing someone a car that you are trying to sell and physically showing them that the car starts and the tires are in good condition.
Inductive reasoning is a form of logical thinking that involves making generalizations based on specific observations. It involves moving from specific instances to broader generalizations. For example, observing that all observed metals expand when heated would lead to the generalization that all metals expand when heated, based on inductive reasoning.
Inductive reasoning is a form of reasoning sometimes used in scientific inquiry, to the background of fixed stars; it is quite a different matter to know why.
If the hands of the watch were altered then the time must be important.
maganda ako
U rivbxavjdky
A deductive argument is a logical reasoning process where the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises. If the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. Deductive arguments are characterized by their validity, meaning that the conclusion cannot be false if the premises are true.
The ability to use deductive thinking is a time saving skill for a Pet Detective.
could you give an example of a ridiculous part of the interface. Thanks.
you should always give reasoning when you need something...........