Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Deductive reasoning offers the strongest support: the premises ensure the conclusion, meaning that it is impossible for the conclusion to be false if all the premises are true. Such an argument is called a valid argument, for example: all men are mortal; Socrates is a man; therefore, Socrates is mortal. For valid arguments, it is not important ...
Argument terminology. Inductive reasoning is a form of argument that—in contrast to deductive reasoning—allows for the possibility that a conclusion can be false, even if all of the premises are true. [39] This difference between deductive and inductive reasoning is reflected in the terminology used to describe deductive and inductive ...
Non-deductive arguments make their conclusion probable but do not ensure that it is true. An example is the inductive argument from the empirical observation that "all ravens I have seen so far are black" to the conclusion "all ravens are black". [36] A further approach is to define informal logic as the study of informal fallacies. [37]
A Mastermind player uses abduction to infer the secret colors (top) from summaries (bottom left) of discrepancies in their guesses (bottom right).. Abductive reasoning (also called abduction, [1] abductive inference, [1] or retroduction [2]) is a form of logical inference that seeks the simplest and most likely conclusion from a set of observations.
It is possible to have a deductive argument that is logically valid but is not sound. Fallacious arguments often take that form. The following is an example of an argument that is “valid”, but not “sound”: Everyone who eats carrots is a quarterback. John eats carrots. Therefore, John is a quarterback.
A priori and a posteriori – Two types of knowledge, justification, or argument; Abductive reasoning – Inference seeking the simplest and most likely explanation; Deductive reasoning – Form of reasoning; Inductive reasoning – Method of logical reasoning
Each one has a name (for example, argument from effect to cause) and presents a type of connection between premises and a conclusion in an argument, and this connection is expressed as a rule of inference. Argumentation schemes can include inferences based on different types of reasoning—deductive, inductive, abductive, probabilistic, etc.
For example, the argument, "All young girls wear skirts; Julie is a young girl; therefore, Julie wears skirts" is valid logically, but is not sound because the first premise isn't true. The syllogism is a form of deductive reasoning in which two statements reach a logical conclusion. With this reasoning, one statement could be "Every A is B ...