0
What else can I help you with?
What word uses specific examples to come to a broader conclusion?
The word you're looking for is "inductive." Inductive reasoning involves using specific examples or observations to draw a broader generalization or conclusion. For instance, observing that the sun rises in the east every day leads to the broader conclusion that the sun always rises in the east.
What is a kind of logical thinking that goes from the specific to the general?
The kind of logical thinking that goes from the specific to the general is known as inductive reasoning. In this process, one observes specific instances or examples and then formulates broader generalizations or theories based on those observations. For example, if one notices that the sun has risen in the east every morning, they may conclude that the sun always rises in the east. Inductive reasoning is often used in scientific research to develop hypotheses and theories.
What reasoning that uses specific observations to make generalizations called?
The reasoning that uses specific observations to make generalizations is called inductive reasoning. This approach involves drawing broader conclusions based on a set of specific instances or evidence. For example, observing that the sun has risen in the east every day leads to the generalization that the sun always rises in the east. Inductive reasoning is often used in scientific research to formulate hypotheses and theories based on collected data.
What is Making a generalization based on a personal experience or a few examples is referred to as?
Making a generalization based on a personal experience or a few examples is referred to as "hasty generalization." This logical fallacy occurs when someone draws a broad conclusion from insufficient evidence, leading to potentially inaccurate or misleading assumptions about a larger group or situation. It emphasizes the importance of considering a broader range of data before forming conclusions.
What do you call conclusion in science?
In science, a conclusion is often referred to as a "hypothesis" or "theory," depending on the context. After conducting experiments and analyzing data, scientists draw conclusions that summarize their findings and indicate whether their initial hypotheses were supported or refuted. These conclusions contribute to the broader understanding of a scientific phenomenon and may lead to further research or revisions of existing theories.
What word uses specific examples to come to a broader conclusion?
The word you're looking for is "inductive." Inductive reasoning involves using specific examples or observations to draw a broader generalization or conclusion. For instance, observing that the sun rises in the east every day leads to the broader conclusion that the sun always rises in the east.
What defines deductive reasoning A A relationship in which one action causes an event B Using specific examples to come to a broader conclusion C A statement that fits into?
A
How are deductive and inductive reasoning diffrent from another?
Deductive reasoning moves from general principles to specific conclusions, while inductive reasoning moves from specific observations to broader generalizations. Deductive reasoning aims to prove a conclusion with certainty, while inductive reasoning aims to support a conclusion with probability.
What is an argument that starts from a specific idea to reach a genral conclusion?
An argument that starts from a specific idea to reach a general conclusion is known as inductive reasoning. In this type of reasoning, specific observations or data points are used to draw a broader conclusion that is considered probable, but not necessarily definitive. Inductive reasoning allows for the generalization of patterns or trends based on specific instances.
What is basing a conclusion on examples?
Basing a conclusion on examples involves using specific instances or cases to support or demonstrate a general statement or claim. It relies on the idea that patterns or trends observed in individual examples can be applied to a broader context to draw a conclusion.
Inductive reasoning creates a conclusion that's likely to be?
Inductive reasoning creates a conclusion that is likely to be true based on the evidence or patterns observed. It involves making generalizations from specific observations to form a broader understanding. However, the conclusion reached through inductive reasoning is not guaranteed to be true, as it is based on probability rather than certainty.
Why us the passage an example of inductive reasoning?
This passage is an example of inductive reasoning because it draws a general conclusion based on specific observations. By noting the actions of individual ants, it makes a broader claim about the behavior of ants as a group. Inductive reasoning involves making generalizations from specific instances, which is evident in this passage.
How does chisholm use inductive reasoning to support her argument?
Chisholm uses inductive reasoning by presenting specific examples or cases to support her general conclusions or claims. By highlighting patterns or trends from these examples, she aims to make a strong case for her argument based on the observed evidence. This approach allows her to draw broader conclusions from specific instances, enhancing the persuasiveness of her argument.
An argument in which the author presents a general conclusion before listing observed specifics is what type of argument?
An argument in which the author presents a general conclusion before listing observed specifics is an inductive argument. Inductive reasoning involves moving from specific observations to broader generalizations or conclusions.
What is a deductive approach?
A deductive approach is a method of reasoning that starts with a general principle or theory and applies it to a specific situation to draw conclusions. It involves moving from a broader perspective to a more specific one to reach a logical conclusion based on the premise provided. This approach is commonly used in scientific research and mathematical reasoning to test hypotheses and make predictions.
How do you formulate a deductive or inductive argument?
Deductive reasoning is reasoning that starts with general principles to form a conclusion about a specific case. To formulate a deductive argument, you should take a general idea or concept, like an ideology or commonly shared moral view and relate it to a more specific subject that links to your side of the argument. Inductive reasoning is the exact opposite; it involves developing a set of specific facts to create a general principle. To formulate an inductive argument, you should take a set of related facts and link them to an overarching moral or concept that supports your argument.
Which of this best describes inductive reasoning?
Inductive reasoning is a type of reasoning where conclusions are made based on patterns and observations. It involves moving from specific observations to broader generalizations. It is probabilistic and does not guarantee certainty in the conclusions drawn.
