Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
There is a debate over whether the argument from ignorance is always fallacious. It is generally accepted that there are only special circumstances in which this argument may not be fallacious. For example, with the presumption of innocence in legal cases, it would make sense to argue: [5] It has not been proven that the defendant is guilty.
Formal logic and mathematical rules are examples of rigorous consistency. An example would be: if all As are Bs and all Bs are Cs, then all As are Cs. While this standard is of high value, it is limited. For example, the premises are a priori (or self-apparent), requiring another test of truth to employ this criterion. Additionally, strict ...
"Illative" means, then, "to bring in". For Newman it is the automatic data-collecting and -processing capacity in the sub-conscious mind, by which we get to know better or deeper both the content and certainty of the first principles of our knowledge, and of many natural and supernatural (religious) concepts and notional and/or real assents ...
Examples include mathematics, [i] tautologies and deduction from pure reason. [ii] A posteriori knowledge depends on empirical evidence. Examples include most fields of science and aspects of personal knowledge. The terms originate from the analytic methods found in Organon, a collection of works by Aristotle.
The types of logical reasoning differ concerning the exact norms they use as well as the certainty of the conclusion they arrive at. [1] [15] Deductive reasoning offers the strongest support and implies its conclusion with certainty, like mathematical proofs. For non-deductive reasoning, the premises make the conclusion more likely but do not ...
The Gettier problem, in the field of epistemology, is a landmark philosophical problem concerning the understanding of descriptive knowledge.Attributed to American philosopher Edmund Gettier, Gettier-type counterexamples (called "Gettier-cases") challenge the long-held justified true belief (JTB) account of knowledge.
G. E. Moore wrote "A Defence of Common Sense" and Proof of an External World.For the purposes of these essays, he posed skeptical hypotheses, such as that according to which we are disembodied souls living in an immaterial world with the mere hallucination of ordinary things induced by a Cartesian evil demon, and then provided his own response to them.
For example, one might argue that it is valid to use inductive inference in the future because this type of reasoning has yielded accurate results in the past. However, this argument relies on an inductive premise itself—that past observations of induction being valid will mean that future observations of induction will also be valid.