1. The document discusses inductive and deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning involves forming conclusions based on specific examples, while deductive reasoning uses general principles to reach conclusions.
2. Inductive reasoning is used to predict patterns in lists of numbers by examining previous terms. Deductive reasoning establishes conclusions by applying general rules.
3. The document provides examples of using inductive reasoning to predict subsequent terms in lists. It also gives examples of finding counterexamples to disprove general statements.
1. The document discusses inductive and deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning involves forming conclusions based on specific examples, while deductive reasoning uses general principles to reach conclusions.
2. Inductive reasoning is used to predict patterns in lists of numbers by examining previous terms. Deductive reasoning establishes conclusions by applying general rules.
3. The document provides examples of using inductive reasoning to predict subsequent terms in lists. It also gives examples of finding counterexamples to disprove general statements.
1. The document discusses inductive and deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning involves forming conclusions based on specific examples, while deductive reasoning uses general principles to reach conclusions.
2. Inductive reasoning is used to predict patterns in lists of numbers by examining previous terms. Deductive reasoning establishes conclusions by applying general rules.
3. The document provides examples of using inductive reasoning to predict subsequent terms in lists. It also gives examples of finding counterexamples to disprove general statements.
1. The document discusses inductive and deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning involves forming conclusions based on specific examples, while deductive reasoning uses general principles to reach conclusions.
2. Inductive reasoning is used to predict patterns in lists of numbers by examining previous terms. Deductive reasoning establishes conclusions by applying general rules.
3. The document provides examples of using inductive reasoning to predict subsequent terms in lists. It also gives examples of finding counterexamples to disprove general statements.
(a) In the Grossman model- how… does the AsserWagdy1 opportunity 0 views • 1 slide cost of a health i.docx (a) What is the marginal tax rate in 2022 f… an individual AsserWagdy1 with 0 views • 1 slide taxab.docx (b) Suppose that one-third of the diabeti… patients in a AsserWagdy1 city are 0 views • 1on slide i.docx 20230224_2152 18.pptx MasoudIbrahim3 0 views • 12 slides
Chap 03 01 (1) 1. CHAPTER Problem Solving 3 2. Inductive and Deductive Reasoning Section3.1 3. 3 Inductive Reasoning 4. 4 Inductive Reasoning The type of reasoning that forms a conclusion based on the examination of specific examples is called inductive reasoning. The conclusion formed by using inductive reasoning is a conjecture, since it may or may not be correct. When you examine a list of numbers and predict the next number in the list according to some pattern you have observed, you are using inductive reasoning. 5. 5 Example 1 – Use Inductive Reasoning to Predict a Number Use inductive reasoning to predict the next number in each of the following lists. a. 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, ? b. 1, 3, 6, 10, 15, ? Solution: a. Each successive number is 3 larger than the preceding number. Thus we predict that the next number in the list is 3 larger than 15, which is 18. 6. 6 Example 1 – Solution b. The first two numbers di!er by 2. The second and the third numbers di!er by 3. It appears that the di!erence between any two numbers is always 1 more than the preceding di!erence. Since 10 and 15 di!er by 5, we predict that the next number in the list will be 6 larger than 15, which is 21. cont’d 7. 7 Counterexamples 8. 8 Counterexamples A statement is a true statement provided that it is true in all cases. If you can find one case for which a statement is not true, called a counterexample, then the statement is a false statement. In Example 4 we verify that each statement is a false statement by finding a counterexample for each. 9. 9 Example 4 – Find a Counterexample Verify that each of the following statements is a false statement by finding a counterexample. For all numbers x: Solution: A statement may have many counterexamples, but we need only find one counter example to verify that the statement is false. a. Let x = 0. Then |0| = 0. Because 0 is not greater than 0, we have found a counterexample. Thus “for all numbers x, |x| > 0” is a false statement. 10. 10 Example 4 – Solution b. For x = 1 we have 12 = 1. Since 1 is not greater than 1, we have found a counterexample. Thus “for all numbers x, x2 > x” is a false statement. c. Consider x = –3. Then . . Since 3 is not equal to –3, we have found a counterexample. Thus “for all numbers x, is a false statement. cont’d 11. 11 Deductive Reasoning 12. 12 Deductive Reasoning Another type of reasoning is called deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning is distinguished from inductive reasoning in that it is the process of reaching a conclusion by applying general principles and procedures. 13. 13 Example 5 – Use Deductive Reasoning to Establish a Conjecture Use deductive reasoning to show that the following procedure produces a number that is four times the original number. Procedure: Pick a number. Multiply the number by 8, add 6 to the product, divide the sum by 2, and subtract 3. 14. 14 Example 5 – Solution Let n represent the original number. Multiply the number by 8: Add 6 to the product: Divide the sum by 2: Subtract 3: We started with n and ended with 4n. The procedure given in this example produces a number that is four times the original number. 15. 15 Inductive Reasoning vs. Deductive Reasoning 16. 16 Inductive Reasoning vs. Deductive Reasoning In the next Example we will analyze arguments to determine whether they use inductive or deductive reasoning. 17. 17 Example 6 – Determine Types of Reasoning Determine whether each of the following arguments is an example of inductive reasoning or deductive reasoning. a. During the past 10 years, a tree has produced plums every other year. Last year the tree did not produce plums, so this year the tree will produce plums. b. All home improvements cost more than the estimate. The contractor estimated that my home improvement will cost $35,000. Thus my home improvement will cost more than $35,000. 18. 18 Example 6 – Solution a. This argument reaches a conclusion based on specific examples, so it is an example of inductive reasoning. b. Because the conclusion is a specific case of a general assumption, this argument is an example of deductive reasoning. 19. 19 Logic Puzzles 20. 20 Logic Puzzles Logic puzzles, similar to the one in Example 7, can be solved by using deductive reasoning and a chart that enables us to display the given information in a visual manner. 21. 21 Example 7 – Solve a Logic Puzzle Each of four neighbors, Sean, Maria, Sarah, and Brian, has a di!erent occupation (editor, banker, chef, or dentist). From the following clues, determine the occupation of each neighbor. 1. Maria gets home from work a"er the banker but before the dentist. 2. Sarah, who is the last to get home from work, is not the editor. 3. The dentist and Sarah leave for work at the same time. 4. The banker lives next door to Brian. 22. 22 Example 7 – Solution From clue 1, Maria is not the banker or the dentist. In the following chart, write X1 (which stands for “ruled out by clue 1”) in the Banker and the Dentist columns of Maria’s row. From clue 2, Sarah is not the editor. Write X2 (ruled out by clue 2) in the Editor column of Sarah’s row. 23. 23 Example 7 – Solution We know from clue 1 that the banker is not the last to get home, and we know from clue 2 that Sarah is the last to get home; therefore, Sarah is not the banker. Write X2 in the Banker column of Sarah’s row. From clue 3, Sarah is not the dentist. Write X3 for this condition. There are now Xs for three of the four occupations in Sarah’s row; therefore, Sarah must be the chef. cont’d 24. 24 Example 7 – Solution Place a in that box. Since Sarah is the chef, none of the other three people can be the chef. Write X3 for these conditions. There are now Xs for three of the four occupations in Maria’s row; therefore, Maria must be the editor. Insert a to indicate that Maria is the editor, and write X3 twice to indicate that neither Sean nor Brian is the editor. cont’d 25. 25 Example 7 – Solution From clue 4, Brian is not the banker. Write X4 for this condition. See the following table. Since there are three Xs in the Banker column, Sean must be the banker. Place a in that box. Thus Sean cannot be the dentist. Write X4 in that box. Since there are 3 Xs in the Dentist column, Brian must be the dentist. Place a in that box. Sean is the banker, Maria is the editor, Sarah is the chef, and Brian is the dentist. cont’d
