BUS 290: Critical Thinking for Managers

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Reason and Argument Induction (Part of Ch. 9 and part of Ch. 10)
Advertisements

Argumentation.
LOGICAL REASONING Study Unit 5 – eLearning RPK 214.
Text Table of Contents #5 and #8: Evaluating the Argument.
Inductive Versus Deductive Reasoning. Warm Up Write the statements that follow. Identify the following statements as inference or observation ___1. Today.
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.
Debate. Inductive Reasoning When you start with a probable truth, and seek evidence to support it. Most scientific theories are inductive. Evidence is.
Critical Thinking: Chapter 10
Logos Formal Logic.
LogicandEvidence Scientific argument. Logic Reasoning –Deductive –Inductive.
Logic. what is an argument? People argue all the time ― that is, they have arguments.  It is not often, however, that in the course of having an argument.
For Friday, read chapter 2, sections 1-2 (pp ). As nongraded homework, do the problems on p. 19. Graded homework #1 is due at the beginning of class.
LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING
BASIC CONCEPTS OF ARGUMENTS
1 Arguments in Philosophy Introduction to Philosophy.
Artificial Intelligence Reasoning. Reasoning is the process of deriving logical conclusions from given facts. Durkin defines reasoning as ‘the process.
Part 2 Module 3 Arguments and deductive reasoning Logic is a formal study of the process of reasoning, or using common sense. Deductive reasoning involves.
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.
Causality, Reasoning in Research, and Why Science is Hard
Key Terms: Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning
0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) December 23, 2005.
Responding Critically to Texts
BUS 290: Critical Thinking for Managers
HAWKES LEARNING Students Count. Success Matters. Copyright © 2015 by Hawkes Learning/Quant Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Section 1.1 Thinking Mathematically.
Section 2-3 Deductive Reasoning. Types of Reasoning:
Reasoning and Critical Thinking Validity and Soundness 1.
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.
DEDUCTIVE REASONING MOVES FROM A GENERALIZATION THAT IS TRUE OR SELF-EVIDENT TO A MORE SPECIFIC CONCLUSION DEDUCTIVE REASONING.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 1-b What is Philosophy? (Part 2) By David Kelsey.
An Introduction to Logic And Fallacious Reasoning
READING #4 “DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENTS” By Robert FitzGibbons from Making educational decisions: an introduction to Philosophy of Education (New York & London:
Theory of Knowledge Ms. Bauer
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.
Logic and Persuasion AGED 520V. Logic and Persuasion Why do scientists need to know logic and persuasion? Scientists are writers and must persuade their.
Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments
Sentence (syntactically Independent grammatical unit) QuestionCommandStatement “This is a class in logic.” “I enjoy logic.” “Today is Friday.”
TOK Mathematics Lesson 2: How do we justify mathematics? ? © Roy White, International College Hong Kong 2013.
Philosophy 148 Inductive Reasoning. Inductive reasoning – common misconceptions: - “The process of deriving general principles from particular facts or.
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 1-b What is Philosophy? (Part 2) By David Kelsey.
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
I think therefore I am - Rene Descartes. REASON (logic) It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence.
One Sample Inf-1 In statistical testing, we use deductive reasoning to specify what should happen if the conjecture or null hypothesis is true. A study.
What is an argument? An argument is, to quote the Monty Python sketch, "a connected series of statements to establish a definite proposition." Huh? Three.
Text Table of Contents #5: Evaluating the Argument.
Introduction to Argument Chapter 2 (Pgs ) AP Language Demi Greiner | Arlyn Rodriguez Period 4.
Induction vs. Deduction. Induction From a set of specific observation to a general conclusion. Uses no distinct form and conclusions are less definitive.
Part One: Assessing the Inference, Deductive and Inductive Reasoning.
Text Table of Contents #4: What are the Reasons?.
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Chapter 3 Basic Logical Concepts (Please read book.)
Inductive / Deductive reasoning
Chapter 9 Persuasion.
The Effects of Code Usage in Intercultural Communication
Chapter 3: Reality Assumptions
Introduction to Logic PHIL 240 Sections
Children’s Evaluation of the Certainty of Inferences by Self and Other
DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING
Arguments.
Making Sense of Arguments
Principles of Argument
Introduction to Philosophy Lecture 1b What is Philosophy? (part 2)
Definitions: Evidence-Based Claims- 1.) the ability to take detailed
Analyzing and Evaluating Arguments
Syllogisms and Enthymemes.
Philosophical Methods
Propositional Logic 1) Introduction Copyright 2008, Scott Gray.
If there is any case in which true premises lead to a false conclusion, the argument is invalid. Therefore this argument is INVALID.
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:

BUS 290: Critical Thinking for Managers Text Table of Contents #4: What are the Reasons?

What Are the Reasons? Arguments intend to convince us to accept a conclusion – i.e., a position, claim, belief, etc. Why does the author want us to accept this conclusion? Reasons tell us why that conclusion should be accepted. Will Ferrell

Identifying the Reasons For each sentence ask: Does this sentence support the conclusion? Or does it make sense when you precede the sentence with: The conclusion is true because …

Reasons Reasons + Inferences  Conclusion The acceptability of a conclusion depends on the quality of the reasons (evidence) the validity of the inferences (logic)

Should the public be shown actual courtroom trials on television? It seems as though the system can easily be corrupted by having cameras in the courtroom. Victims are hesitant enough when testifying in front of a small crowd, but their knowledge that every word is being sent to countless homes would increase the likelihood that they would simply refuse to testify. There is little to no assumed innocence for the accused when their trial is put on television. People do not watch court television because they are concerned about our country’s ability to effectively carry out the proceedings of the judicial system; instead, they are looking for the drama in witness testimony: entertainment. Thus, leave the cameras out of the courtrooms, and let the public view sitcom drama based on the legal system.

Issue: Should court trials be televised to the public? Conclusion: Do not televise court trials. R1: Televising corrupts judicial system. SR1a: Fewer victims will testify. SR1b: Presumed innocence will disappear. R2: Public wants drama in witness’ testimony (i.e., entertainment) – not judicial process.

Inference Infer  deduce or conclude (information) from evidence and reasoning rather than from explicit statements (Oxford dictionary) Validity of inference does not refer to truth of premise or conclusion refers to the form of the inference i.e., how the inference is drawn A word about inference - induction vs. deduction induction – results in probable conclusion deduction results in certain conclusion

Valid Form of Inference All fruits are sweet. A banana is a fruit. Therefore, a banana is sweet. For the conclusion to be necessarily true, the premises need to be true.

Invalid Form of Inference Leading from true premises to a false conclusion. All apples are fruit. (correct) Bananas are fruit. (correct) Therefore, bananas are apples. (incorrect) Do you understand why this argument is invalid?

Validity of Inference When a valid argument is used to derive a false conclusion from false premises, the inference is valid because it follows the form of a correct inference. A valid argument with false premises may lead to a false conclusion: All tall people are Greek. (incorrect) John Lennon was tall. (correct) Therefore, John Lennon was Greek. (incorrect) Do you understand why this argument is valid?

Validity of Inference A valid argument can also be used to derive a true conclusion from false premises: All tall people are musicians (incorrect) John Lennon was tall (correct) Therefore, John Lennon was a musician (correct) Do you understand why this argument is valid?

Quality of Evidence Facts, examples, analogies, statistics, authorities, etc. Observations, beliefs, principles Later we will explore more thoroughly how to evaluate the quality of evidence