The most difficult reasoning to use was inductive. First, I did not have any clue what it meant to reason by induction. I could not find the difference between reasoning by deduction and induction. It seems both are just about reasoning using rationality. But, shouldn't all reasoning be rational? Of course, if we want to reason with someone and get something done, rationality would be the best way to approach it. Rationality should always be a part of every argument/reasoning.
Reasoning is a part of human nature. Reasoning is what defines human versus the animals. Reasoning is logic. Reasoning encompasses all sorts of forms. But, the best form is using fear. Is fear rational? I would argue yes. Fear is a normal part of the human condition. Fear is a big part of life, so if someone wants to tap into fear as a way of reasoning, that is logical.
I definitely had trouble with something very similar. I couldn’t figure out the difference with reasoning by criteria and reasoning by example, but your example could be easily confused as well. You definitely did a good job arguing that everything needs to be rational anyhow. Both deduction and induction definitely need to use rational in arguing. I liked how you used rational to deduce that both concepts and then slowly transitioned into the concept of fear and realized all humans are prone to fear and it is logical to be scared in some way. You basically turned what you learned and gave an example!
ReplyDeleteI agree with you inductive reasoning is very difficult to understand at first. I had trouble with it too. From what I understood, Inductive reasoning is the method where a conclusion is drawn based on a set of observations. It is not really a valid method of proof. Inductive reasoning is used very often. An example would be, after seeing people outside, I’ve observed that many teenagers own poodles. Therefore all poodles are owned by teenagers. This isn’t a very good method of proof for the observation. You can see how a false conclusion can easily me made in inductive reasoning.
ReplyDelete