An argument is “a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.” The connected series of statements are “premises” and the proposition is the conclusion. For example:
- All humans are mortal. (premise)
- Socrates is a human. (premise)
- Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (conclusion)
this example of deductive reasoning which itself is a kind of logical reasoning. there are many other types of reasoning
Reasoning Types
|
Reasoning Types |
Description |
|---|---|
|
human reasoning includes:
| |
|
Logical Reasoning (Deductive - Inductive - Abductive - Analogical - Fallacious) |
includes:
|
|
defeasible reasoning is a kind of reasoning that is rationally compelling, though not deductively valid. It usually occurs when a rule is given, but there may be specific exceptions to the rule, or subclasses that are subject to a different rule | |
|
a fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning, or “wrong moves” in the construction of an argument. A fallacious argument may be deceptive by appearing to be better than it really is |
Differences Between Reasoning Types
The differences between various kinds of reasoning correspond to differences about the conditional (if x then y) that each kind of reasoning uses, and on what premise (or on what authority) the conditional is adopted:
- Deductive (from meaning postulate or axiom): if p then q (i.e., ¬p v q)
- Inductive (theory formation; from data, coherence, simplicity, and confirmation): (inducibly) “if p then q”; hence, if p then (deducibly-but-revisably) q
- Abductive (from data and theory): p and q are correlated, and q is sufficient for p; hence, if p then (abducibly) q as cause
- Defeasible (from authority): if p then (defeasibly) q
- Probabilistic (from combinatorics and indifference): if p then (probably) q
- Statistical (from data and presumption): the frequency of qs among ps is high (or inference from a model fit to data); hence, (in the right context) if p then (probably) q