Scribd
Upload
23 views

CT&R Week 4

This document discusses different types of reasoning including deductive and inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning uses syllogisms and formal logic to draw conclusions. Inductive reasoning uses analogy, hypothesis testing, and observation. Valid deductive reasoning follows rules like modus ponens while invalid forms commit logical fallacies by denying the antecedent or affirming the consequent. Inductive reasoning involves forming hypotheses and testing them through experimentation and data collection.

Uploaded by

vkg93610
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
23 views

CT&R Week 4

This document discusses different types of reasoning including deductive and inductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning uses syllogisms and formal logic to draw conclusions. Inductive reasoning uses analogy, hypothesis testing, and observation. Valid deductive reasoning follows rules like modus ponens while invalid forms commit logical fallacies by denying the antecedent or affirming the consequent. Inductive reasoning involves forming hypotheses and testing them through experimentation and data collection.

Uploaded by

vkg93610
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 29

Reasoning

http://www.toothpastefordinner.com/012408/circular-reasoning.gif
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning

 deductive validity

 Inductive Reasoning

 inductive strength
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Syllogistic reasoning

Basic syllogism:

Premise 1: All A are B.


Premise 2: All B are C.
Conclusion: Therefore, all A are C.
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Syllogistic reasoning

Syllogism example:
All red books are astronomy books.
All astronomy books are large.

All red books are large.


Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Syllogistic reasoning

 Categorical syllogisms

 Conditional syllogisms
1. All Beagles are dogs
All dogs have fur.
Therefore:

2. Some teachers are women.


All women are human.
Therefore:

3. No elephants are carnivorous.


Some dogs are carnivorous.
Therefore:
4. Some cats are grey.
Some cats like dogs.
Therefore:

5. All ghost stories are scary.


No jokes are scary.
Therefore:

6. No documentary films make money.


No nonfiction books make money.
Therefore:
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Principlesof validity and truth in syllogisms
 Principle 2: the validity of a syllogism is
determined only by its form, not its content.

All birds are ants.


All ants have four legs.
Therefore, all birds have four legs.
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Principlesof validity and truth in syllogisms
 Principle 1: if two premises are true, the
conclusion of a valid syllogism must be true.

All birds are animals.


All animals eat food.
Therefore, all birds eat food.
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Using Euler circles to determine validity
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Studying Syllogisms

 Normative Approach

 Descriptive Approach
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Studying Syllogisms

 Normative Approach

 Descriptive Approach
Reasoning Performance
 Premise phrasing

Illustrations of possible meanings of “Some bers are sabs.”


Reasoning Performance
 Alternation of premise meaning

Illustration of possible meanings of “All daxes are wugs.”


Reasoning Performance
 Failure to consider all possibilities
Reasoning Performance
 Believability effects

All of the students are tired. All of the men are tired.
Some tired people are irritable. Some tired people are women.
Some of the students are irritable. Some of the men are women.

All of the students are tired. All of the men are tired.
Some tired people are irritable. Some tired people are women.
Some of the students are irritable. Some of the men are women.
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Conditional syllogisms
 An example of a logical argument

Premise pq If “p,” then “q”


Existing condition p p is true
Conclusion q
therefore, q is true
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Formal Logic
 Inference rules
 Modus Ponens (valid)

pq If “p,” then “q”


p p is true

¬ p therefore, q is true


Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Formal Logic
 Inference rules
 Modus Tollens (valid)

pq If “p,” then “q”


¬q q is not true

¬ p therefore, p is not true


Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Formal Logic
 Fallacies
 Denying the antecedent (invalid)

pq If “p,” then “q”


¬p p is not true

¬ q therefore, q is not true


Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning
 Formal Logic
 Fallacies
 Affirming the consequent (invalid)

pq If “p,” then “q”


q q is true

p therefore, p is true


Summary of Conditional Syllogisms
Type of 2nd Premise Conclusion Valid?
Syllogism

Modus Ponens p q Yes

Modus Tollens Not q Not p Yes


Denying the Not p Not q No
antecedent

Affirming the q p No
consequent
Types of Reasoning
 Deductive Reasoning

Wason’s selection task (or four-card task)


Check 1 Check 3

$35 $20

Check 2 Check 4

initials no initials
Types of Reasoning
 Inductive Reasoning
Types of Reasoning
 Inductive
Reasoning
 Analogical
reasoning

Examples of verbal and


pictorial analogies.
Types of Reasoning
 Inductive
Reasoning
 Analogical
reasoning

Example of a matrix
completion problem.
Types of Reasoning
 Inductive Reasoning
 Hypothesis testing

 Confirmation bias
Approaches to Studying Reasoning

 Fallacies in Reasoning
 Equivocation
 Illicit
contrast
 Argument by innuendo
 Loaded question
 Fallacy of the continuum
 Fallacy of composition

You might also like