Math 4

- is a 1.3-unit subject that meets four times (50 minutes per

meeting) a week.
- This subject introduces students to plane geometry, analytic
geometry, and trigonometry.
- The course combines both an inquiry-based and discovery
approach, and a deductive reasoning and axiomatic treatment
to geometry and trigonometry.
- It also includes the use of manipulative devices (e.g.
construction tools) to analyze the relationship between
geometric figures and graphs and properties of trigonometric
functions.
Grading System:
20% - Quizzes/Practical Tests/Construction Activities
30% - Long Tests/ Achievement Test
30% - Periodic Exam
20% - Other requirements (e.g. homework, seatwork,
notebook, problem set, portfolio, recitation,
project)
_______
100%
Axiomatic
Systems
 The Axiomatic System
The Axiomatic system is a list of undefined terms
together with a list of statements (called “axioms”) that
are presupposed to be “true”.

A theorem is any statement that can be proven using

logical deductions from axioms.
 Features of Axiomatic Systems
One motivation for developing axiomatic systems is to
determine precisely which properties of certain objects can be
deduced from which properties.

The goal is to choose a certain fundamental properties (the

axioms) from which other properties of the objects can be
deduced (e.g. theorems). Apart from the properties given in
the axioms, the objects are regarded as undefined.
 4 Kinds of Reasoning

• Intuition
•Analogy
•Deductive
•Inductive
Intuition
With intuition we designate the
instinctive and unconscious knowing without
deduction or reasoning.
Intuition is receiving input and ideas without knowing
exactly how and where you got them from. You simply know
it is not from yourself. When we use our intuition, we do not
evaluate a whole series of alternatives, as many as decision
making models suggest that we should.
 Intuition
Intuition can be trained and in its highest level leads into a conscious
contact with non-incarnated beings, a process usually called
channelling.
Most of us are used to making intuitive decisions in our daily lives:
As soon as subjective judgement is involved, rational reasoning is
very difficult to apply.
Intuitive decision making is far more than using common sense
because it involves additional sensors to perceive and get aware of the
information from outside. Sometimes it is referred to as gut feeling,
sixth sense, inner sense, instinct, inner voice, spiritual guide, etc.
Analogy and Analogical Reasoning
An analogy is a comparison between two objects, or systems of
objects, that highlights respects in which they are thought to be
similar.

Analogical Reasoning is any type of thinking that relies upon an

analogy. An analogical argument is an explicit representation of a
form of analogical reasoning that cites accepted similarities between
two systems to support the conclusion that some further similarity
exists.
Analogy and Analogical Reasoning
In general (but not always), such arguments belong in the category
of inductive reasoning, since their conclusions do not follow with
certainty but are only supported with varying degrees of strength.

Historically, analogical reasoning has played an important, but

sometimes mysterious, role in a wide-range of problem-solving
contexts. The explicit use of analogical arguments, since antiquity,
has been a distinctive feature of scientific, philosophical and legal
reasoning.
Analogy
Reasoning by comparison
 Argument by Analogy
• Analogies are based on similarity, comparison, or
precedent.
• The inference being made is that two things which
resemble each other in certain known respects will
resemble each other in unknown respects.
• example: Many who oppose abortion compare it to the
Holocaust, when millions of Jews were exterminated by
the Nazis.
• example: An atheist says, “I don’t believe in Jesus any
more than I believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Clause,
or the Tooth Fairy.”
 Some sample analogies
• Plato compared the world we
perceive to shadows on a cave
wall.
• Comparing human consciousness
to a flame on a candle
• Comparing scientists involved in
cloning research to Dr.
Frankenstein.
Political cartoons often rely on visual analogies
 Examples
Rectangles and Boxes
1. Suppose that you have established that of all
rectangles with a fixed perimeter, the square has
maximum area. By analogy, you conjecture that of
all boxes with a fixed surface area, the cube has
maximum volume.
 Examples
2. Morphine and Meperidine
In 1934, the pharmacologist Schaumann was testing synthetic
compounds for their anti-spasmodic effect. These drugs had a chemical
structure similar to morphine. He observed that one of the compounds –
meperidine, also known as Demerol – had a physical effect on mice that
was previously observed only with morphine:
It induced an S-shaped tail curvature. By analogy, he conjectured that
the drug might also share morphine’s narcotic effects. Testing on rabbits,
dogs and eventually humans showed that meperidine, like morphine,
was an effective pain killer (Lembeck 1989: 11;Reynolds and Randall
1975:273)
Examples
3. Priestly on Electrostatic force
In 1769, Priestly suggested that the absence of
electrical influence inside a hollow charged spherical
shell was evidence that charges attract and repel with
an inverse square force. He supported his hypothesis
by appealing to the analogous situation of zero
gravitational force inside a hollow shell of uniform
density.
 Examples
Example 4 (Duty of reasonable care).
In a much-cited case (Donoghue v. Stevenson 1932 AC 562), the United Kingdom House
of Lords found the manufacturer of a bottle of ginger beer liable for damages to a
consumer who became ill as a result of a dead snail in the bottle. The court argued that
the manufacturer had a duty to take “reasonable care” in creating a product that could
foreseeably result in harm to the consumer in the absence of such care, and where the
consumer had no possibility of intermediate examination. The principle articulated in
this famous case was extended, by analogy, to allow recovery for harm against an
engineering firm whose negligent repair work caused the collapse of a lift (Haseldine v.
CA Daw & Son Ltd. 1941 2 KB 343). By contrast, the principle was not applicable to a
case where a workman was injured by a defective crane, since the workman had
opportunity to examine the crane and was even aware of the defects (Farr v. Butters
Brothers & Co. 1932 2 KB 606).
 Problem Solving
• Logic – The science of correct reasoning.
• Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions
from known or assumed facts.
When solving a problem, one must understand the
question, gather all pertinent facts, analyze the problem
i.e. compare with previous problems (note similarities
and differences), perhaps use pictures or formulas to
solve the problem.
 Deductive Reasoning
• Syllogism: An argument composed of two statements or
premises (the major and minor premises), followed by a
conclusion.
• For any given set of premises, if the conclusion is guaranteed,
the arguments is said to be valid.
• If the conclusion is not guaranteed (at least one instance in
which the conclusion does not follow), the argument is said to be
invalid.
• BE CARFEUL, DO NOT CONFUSE TRUTH WITH
VALIDITY!
 Deductive Reasoning
• Deductive Reasoning – A type of logic in which one
goes from a general statement to a specific instance.
• The classic example
All men are mortal. (major premise)
Socrates is a man. (minor premise)
Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (conclusion)
The above is an example of a syllogism.
 Deductive Reasoning

• Attempts to provide sufficient (or conclusive)

evidence for the conclusion
• Deductive reasoning can be recognized by the
structure of the argument and sometimes by
the conclusion offered.
 Deductive Reasoning
• Deduction: start with a general assertion and
ask what specifically follows from that
assertion. Tells you what must be true.
Note! That truth value of the general assertion
does not matter--we’re interested in logic.
 Deductive Reasoning
Examples:
1. All students in PSHS –SRC eat pizza.
Claire is a student at SRC.
Therefore, Claire eats pizza.

2. All athletes work out in the gym.

Barry Bonds is an athlete.
Therefore, Barry Bonds works out in the gym.
 Deductive Reasoning

3. All math teachers are over 7 feet tall.

Mr. D. is a math teacher.
Therefore, Mr. D is over 7 feet tall.
• The argument is valid, but is certainly not true.
 Inductive Reasoning
• attempts to make the conclusion probable or
likely—evidence is not intended to be conclusive.
• typically recognized by probabilistic claims in
either or both of the premises and conclusions.
• includes statistical and demographic reasoning,
predictions, analogies and explanations.
 Inductive Reasoning
• involves going from a series of specific cases to a
general statement. The conclusion in an inductive
argument is never guaranteed.
Example: What is the next number in the sequence
6, 13, 20, 27,…
There is more than one correct answer.
 Inductive Reasoning
• Here’s the sequence again 6, 13, 20, 27,…
• Look at the difference of each term.
13 – 6 = 7, 20 – 13 = 7, 27 – 20 = 7
Thus the next term is 34, because 34 – 27 = 7.
However what if the sequence represents the dates.
Then the next number could be 3 (31 days in a month).
• The next number could be 4 (30 day month)
• Or it could be 5 (29 day month – Feb. Leap year)
• Or even 6 (28 day month – Feb.)
 Some Examples
• Either Bob or Joe was going to win the award. Bob
didn’t win, so Joe must have.
• I think Wayne committed the murder. He had the
motive, he had the opportunity, his bloody glove was
found on the scene, and he has no alibi.
• I’m sure Alice knows how to swim. After all, most
people know how to swim.
 More Examples
• If you stop smoking, you’ll live longer. Current
research shows that on average, non-smokers live 5.5
years longer than smokers.
• If we stick with our current quarterback, our team
probably won’t get any better. He’s had a few years
now, and we haven’t improved yet. Perhaps it’s time for
someone new.
• Since 2 x 2=4, and 22 is the same as 2 x 2, then 22=4.
 Exercises
Read the following arguments and determine whether they use inductive or deductive
reasoning:
1.Since today is Friday, tomorrow will be Saturday. _____

2.Since it snowed every New Year's Day for the past four years it will snow on New Year's
Day this year. _____

3.A child examines ten tulips, all of which are red, and concludes that all tulips must be red.

4. If an isosceles triangle has at least two sides congruent, then an equilateral triangle is
also isosceles. _____

5.Sandy earned A's on her first six geometry tests so she concludes that she will always
earn A's on geometry tests. _____

6.If 5x = 25, then x =5. _____