Making Inferences Drawing conclusions from two premises: When it rains, the grass gets wet. The grass is wet. Can we assume that it rained? Can we jump.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

-- in other words, logic is

Advertisements

Four Rules of Aristotelian Logic 1. Rule of Identity: A is A 2. Rule of Non-Contradiction: A is not (-A) 3. Rule of Excluded Middle: Either A or (-A)

1 Valid and Invalid arguments. 2 Definition of Argument Sequence of statements: Statement 1; Statement 2; Therefore, Statement 3. Statements 1 and 2 are.

LOGIC AND REASON We can acquire new knowledge about the world by using reason. We constantly use reason to go beyond the immediate evidence of our senses.

Philosophy 103 Linguistics 103 Introductory Logic: Critical Thinking Fall 2007 Dr. Robert Barnard.

Critical Thinking (and Logical Fallacies) All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. All cadets wear uniforms. Thompson wears.

Chapter 1 The Logic of Compound Statements. Section 1.3 Valid & Invalid Arguments.

Logic programming ( Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence, Vol) by D. M. Gabbay, C. Hogger, J.A. Robinson. 1.

The Three Appeals of Argument

Clarke, R. J (2001) L951-08: 1 Critical Issues in Information Systems BUSS 951 Seminar 8 Arguments.

Copyright © Peter Cappello Logical Inferences Goals for propositional logic 1.Introduce notion of a valid argument & rules of inference. 2.Use inference.

LOGIC CHAPTER 3 1. EULER DIAGRAMS: A PROBLEM-SOLVING TOOL

The ubiquity of logic One common example of reasoning  If I take an umbrella, I can prevent getting wet by rain  I don’t want to get myself wet by rain.

Add Copyright © 2010 by Gamehinge

Observation vs Inference. Observation Using your 5 senses to gather information Can be QUANTITATIVE or QUALITATIVE  Qua l itative – Uses descriptive.

0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) December 23, 2005.

Deduction, Validity, Soundness Lecture II – 01/25/11.

Question of the Day!  We shared a lot of examples of illogical arguments!  But how do you make a LOGICAL argument? What does your argument need? What.

Unit 1 – Foundations of Logic Reasoning and Arguments.

REASONING AS PROBLEM SOLVING DEDUCTIVE REASONING: –what, if any, conclusions necessarily follow? INDUCTIVE REASONING: –what is the probability that those.

Goal: Describe the scientific processes of observing and inferring

2.8 Methods of Proof PHIL 012 1/26/2001.

Section 2-2: Conditional Statements. Conditional A statement that can be written in If-then form symbol: If p —>, then q.

0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) All dogs have two heads. 2. All tigers are dogs. ___________________________________ 3. All tigers have two.

DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions from.

DEDUCTIVE VS. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. PROBLEM SOLVING Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.

Reasoning deduction, induction, abduction Problem solving.

09/17/07 BR- What is “logic?” What does it mean to make a logical argument? Today: Logic and How to Argue (Part 1)

Deductive Reasoning. Deductive reasoning The process of logical reasoning from general principles to specific instances based on the assumed truth of.

Deductive and Inductive Reasoning

If-then statement The hypothesis and conclusion of a conditional statement If two angles are congruent, then they have the same measure. Converse Interchanging.

 Induction is the process of drawing a general conclusion from incomplete evidence.  You consider evidence you have seen or heard to draw a conclusion.

If then Therefore It is rainingthe ground is wet It is raining the ground is wet.

Logic: The Language of Philosophy. What is Logic? Logic is the study of argumentation o In Philosophy, there are no right or wrong opinions, but there.

2.1 Using Inductive Reasoning to Make Conjectures.

Introduction to Philosophy Doing Philosophy: Arguments

Copyright © Peter Cappello

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

Analyze Conditional Statements

a valid argument with true premises.

Let’s connect ideas logically!

Inductive vs. Deductive Reasoning

Logic programming ( Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence, Vol) by D. M. Gabbay, C. Hogger, J.A. Robinson .

Copyright © Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Validity and Soundness

Philosophy Test #1 Revision

Logical Inferences: A set of premises accompanied by a suggested conclusion regardless of whether or not the conclusion is a logical consequence of the.

Testing for Validity and Invalidity

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

DEDUCTIVE REASONING Forensic Science.

Science Process Skills

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING Section 1.1. Problem Solving Logic – The science of correct reasoning. Reasoning – The drawing of inferences or conclusions.

1 Chapter An Introduction to Problem Solving

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

1 Chapter An Introduction to Problem Solving

Validity & Invalidity Valid arguments guarantee true conclusions but only when all of their premises are true Invalid arguments do not guarantee true conclusions.

Science Process Skills

Observation vs Inference

6.4 Truth Tables for Arguments

What do you observe?.

Phil2303 intro to logic.

Observations and Inferences

6-2: Indirect Proofs Proof Geometry.

Critical Thinking Lecture 11 The Syllogism

Mystery Picture ????????????.

If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.

Presentation transcript:

Making Inferences Drawing conclusions from two premises: When it rains, the grass gets wet. The grass is wet. Can we assume that it rained? Can we jump to that conclusion just because we know the grass gets wet when it rains? What other way could the grass get wet? Copyright © 2010 by Gamehinge

When it rains, the grass gets wet. The grass is wet. (Premises) It rained. (Conclusion) The conclusion would be false if the grass got wet from sprinklers. When it rains, the grass gets wet. It rained. (Premises) The grass is wet. (Conclusion) If both premises are true, then that conclusion is true or logical.

All students are mortal. Socrates is a student. Socrates is mortal. If the two premises are true, that conclusion makes sense or is logical.

All students are mortal. Socrates is mortal. Socrates is a student. That conclusion would be false if: Socrates is a bird. Birds are mortal.

All birds have wings. Zero is a bird. Zero has wings. Logical argument All birds have wings. Zero has wings. Zero is a bird. Conclusion would be false if: Zero is an angel or an airplane.

All basketball players are tall. Gabby is a basketball player. Gabby is tall. Logical argument All basketball players are tall. Sam is tall. Sam is a basketball player. Conclusion would be false if: Sam is a giraffe or a skyscraper.

All A students are smart. Lucy is an A student. Lucy is smart. Logical argument All A students are smart. Pete is smart. Pete is an A student. Conclusion would be false if: Pete is a dropout.