Scribd
Upload
65 views

Module 6 Reasoning

Inductive and deductive reasoning are two methods of logical thinking. [1] Inductive reasoning moves from specific observations to broader generalizations, while deductive reasoning moves from general principles to specific conclusions. [2] Examples of inductive reasoning include drawing conclusions about a restaurant's quality based on one good meal, while deductive reasoning is illustrated by concluding that Socrates is mortal given the premises that all men are mortal and Socrates is a man. [3] Syllogisms and enthymemes are forms of deductive reasoning that involve major and minor premises leading to a necessary conclusion.

Uploaded by

Christian Geromiano
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
65 views

Module 6 Reasoning

Inductive and deductive reasoning are two methods of logical thinking. [1] Inductive reasoning moves from specific observations to broader generalizations, while deductive reasoning moves from general principles to specific conclusions. [2] Examples of inductive reasoning include drawing conclusions about a restaurant's quality based on one good meal, while deductive reasoning is illustrated by concluding that Socrates is mortal given the premises that all men are mortal and Socrates is a man. [3] Syllogisms and enthymemes are forms of deductive reasoning that involve major and minor premises leading to a necessary conclusion.

Uploaded by

Christian Geromiano
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 13

Reasoning

Prof. Jojo Abad, MPA


Reasoning
Reasoning is often classified as inductive or
deductive.

• Inductive reasoning moves from specific cases to


generalizations.

• Deductive reasoning moves from general to


specific. Syllogisms are deductive forms of
argument.
What is Inductive Reasoning?
• Inductive reasoning is a method of logical thinking
in which you use observations combined with
experiential information you already know to be
true to reach a conclusion. When you are able to
look at a specific set of data and form general
conclusions based on existing knowledge from past
experiences, you are using inductive reasoning.
• Inductive reasoning is a method of reasoning in which
the premises are viewed as supplying some evidence,
but not full assurance, for the truth of the conclusion. It
is also described as a method where one's experiences
and observations, including what are learned from
others, are synthesized to come up with a general
truth.

• Inductive reasoning is distinct


from deductive reasoning. While the conclusion of a
deductive argument is certain, the truth of the
conclusion of an inductive argument is probable, based
upon the evidence given
Inductive Reasoning example:

“I had Crispy Pata at the new Kuya J Restaurant branch last night and it
was very good” “I can therefore safely conclude that this is an excellent
restaurant” , and in fact, “I would have to say that Kuya J food is excellent!”

Deductive Reasoning example:

“All men are mortal , Socrates is a man; Socrates is mortal.


Antecedent Probability
• This is an argument from cause to effect.

• Is an inference from a known cause to an unknown


effect. This type of argument is also called an priori
argument.

• To bring another fact.


Argument from Example
• An argument by example (also known as argument from
example) is an argument in which a claim is supported by
providing examples. Most conclusions drawn in surveys and
carefully controlled experiments are arguments by example
and generalization. Studies that analyze past speeches also
draw conclusions by taking specific examples of
communication and inferring generalizations from them.

• Arguments from example may be difficult to recognize


because they can look like mere illustration.
Deductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning moves from general to specific. Two
special forms of deductive reasoning are the syllogism and the
enthymeme.

• Enthymeme - shortened syllogism, in which one of the


premises or the conclusion is not stated. Enthymeme is like
syllogism, and yet different. The difference is that a
syllogism is a deductive logic that contains three parts, and
in which both premises have valid conclusion such as:

All reptiles are cold-blooded animals. (Major premise)


A lizard is a cold-blooded animal. (Minor premise)
Therefore, a lizard is a reptile. (Conclusion)
Deductive Reasoning
Syllogism A systematic arrangement of arguments consisting
of a major premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion.
Syllogisms are deductive forms of argument, proceeding from
generalization to specific application. We will discuss three
types of syllogisms:

1.Categorical,
2.Disjunctive, and
3.Conditional.

First, however, we should consider the structure of all types of


syllogisms.
A major premise, which is a proposition stating a generalization (“All
A’s are B’s”), a minor premise, which is a proposition stating a
specific instance related to the generalization (“C is an A”) and a
conclusion, which necessarily must follow from these premises
(“Therefore, C is a B”)

The following is an example of syllogistic reasoning:

• All legally insane persons are incompetent to make binding


agreements. (major premise)
• John Cruz is legally insane. (minor premise)
• Therefore, John Cruz is incompetent to make a binding
agreement. (conclusion)
Rules of Syllogism
Syllogisms consist of three things: major & minor (the
premises) and a conclusion, which follows logically from the
major and the minor and is derived from the given statements.
A major is a general principle. A minor is a specific statement.
Logically, the conclusion follows from applying the major to the
minor.
Example

The open shop is good for unions because it makes them more democratic.

Major : Whatever makes unions more democratic is good for unions.


Minor : But the open shop (is something that) makes unions more
democratic.
Conclusion : Therefore the open shop is for unions.

• Communism, simply because it is a godless philosophy, contains within


itself the seeds its own destruction

• Teachers’ unions are not desirable because they take away local control
of schools
END OF PRESENTATION

You might also like