DEDUCTIVE REASONING MOVES FROM A GENERALIZATION THAT IS TRUE OR SELF-EVIDENT TO A MORE SPECIFIC CONCLUSION DEDUCTIVE REASONING.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Advertisements

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.

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

Rules of Inferences Section 1.5. Definitions Argument: is a sequence of propositions (premises) that end with a proposition called conclusion. Valid Argument:

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

Evaluating an Author’s Argument. © 2008 McGraw-Hill Higher Education Chapter 11: Evaluating an Author's Argument 2 Author’s Argument An author’s argument.

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.

Debate. Inductive Reasoning When you start with a probable truth, and seek evidence to support it. Most scientific theories are inductive. Evidence is.

Syllogisms English 1301: Composition & Rhetoric I || D. Glen Smith, instructor.

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.

So far we have learned about:

Inductive and Deductive Reasoning Geometry 1.0 – Students demonstrate understanding by identifying and giving examples of inductive and deductive reasoning.

Critical Thinking Crash Course Topic 1: Deductive versus Inductive Logic.

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.

Basic Argumentation.

Key Terms: Deductive vs. Inductive Reasoning

Logic and Philosophy Alan Hausman PART ONE Sentential Logic Sentential Logic.

Section 2-3 Deductive Reasoning. Types of Reasoning:

Applying Deductive Reasoning Section 2.3. Essential Question How do you construct a logical argument?

Deductive Reasoning Chapter 2 Lesson 4.

 ESSENTIAL QUESTION  How can you use reasoning to solve problems?  Scholars will  Use the Law of Syllogism  Use the Law of Detachment UNIT 01 – LESSON.

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

CHAPTER 9 THINKING CRITICALLY IN THIS CHAPTER YOU WILL LEARN: What it means to think critically, and why it is important What facts and opinions are, and.

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

Persuasion Terms. Logos- The process of reasoning that uses logic, numbers facts and data. Pathos- When the writer appeals to the reader’s emotions Ethos-

Section 2.3: Deductive Reasoning

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

Elements of Argument Logic vs. Rhetoric. Syllogism Major Premise: Advertising of things harmful to our health should be legally banned. Minor Premise:

Deductive s. Inductive Reasoning

© 2009 McGraw-Hill Higher Education. All rights reserved.1 Chapters1 & 2.

Introduction to Argument Chapter 2 (Pgs ) AP Language Demi Greiner | Arlyn Rodriguez Period 4.

Text Table of Contents #4: What are the Reasons?.

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

Deductive reasoning.

2-4 Deductive Reasoning Objective:

a valid argument with true premises.

Chapter 1: Good and Bad Reasoning

Deductive and Inductive REASONING

Deductive Logic, Categorical Syllogism

5 Categorical Syllogisms

The second Meeting Basic Terms in Logic.

} { Using facts, definitions, accepted properties and the

Chapter 3: Reality Assumptions

Evaluate Deductive Reasoning and Spot Deductive Fallacies

Sec. 2.3: Apply Deductive Reasoning

3 Logic The Study of What’s True or False or Somewhere in Between.

2.4 Deductive Reasoning.

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

DEDUCTIVE REASONING Forensic Science.

Argumentation Strategies

Developing Arguments for Persuasive Speeches

Titanic Unit Vocabulary

2.3 Apply Deductive Reasoning

Making Sense of Arguments

Structuring and Analyzing Arguments:

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

DEDUCTIVE vs. INDUCTIVE REASONING

Structuring and Analyzing Arguments:

8C Truth Tables, 8D, 8E Implications 8F Valid Arguments

Syllogisms and Enthymemes.

2-4 Deductive Reasoning Vocab:

Evaluating Deductive Arguments

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:

DEDUCTIVE REASONING MOVES FROM A GENERALIZATION THAT IS TRUE OR SELF-EVIDENT TO A MORE SPECIFIC CONCLUSION DEDUCTIVE REASONING

One kind of deductive reasoning is a syllogism – A syllogism is a three-part set of statements or propositions that includes a major premise, a minor premise and a conclusion. For Example: Major Premise: all books from Barnes & Noble are new Minor Premise: this book is from Barnes & Noble Conclusion: this book is new

A major premise of a syllogism makes a general statement that the writer believes to be true The minor premise presents a specific example of the belief that is stated in the major premise If the reasoning is sound, the conclusion that follows MUST be true because it follows from the premises. Note that the conclusion contains no terms that have not already appeared in the premises. The strength of a deductive argument is that if readers accept the premises, they must grant the conclusion

CONSTRUCTING SOUND SYLLOGISMS A syllogism is valid (or logical) when its conclusion follows from its premises. A syllogism is true when it makes accurate claims (ie. The information it contains is consistent with the facts). To be sound, a syllogism must be both valid and true. A syllogism can be valid without being true, or vice versa.

THE FOLLOWING SYLLOGISM IS VALID, BUT NOT TRUE, AND THEREFORE NOT SOUND Major premise: all politicians are male Minor premise: Wendy Davis is a politician Conclusion: Therefore, Wendy Davis is male As odd as it may seem, this syllogism is valid. In the major premise, the phrase all politicians establishes that the entire class politicians is male. After Wendy Davis is identified as a politician, the conclusion that she is male follows. But of course, she is not male. The major premise is not true, therefore no conclusion based on it can possibly be true. Even though the logic is correct, its conclusion is not. Therefore, the syllogism is not sound.

Major premise: All girls with blue eyes go to Central Park on Mondays Minor premise: Sally has blue eyes Conclusion: Sally goes to Central Park every Monday