Jane Robbed the Bank Inductive: -when she was in grade school, her parents were called by the principal for stealing her classmates' erasers and pencils on their bags. -In junior high, she was arrested by the local police for shoplifting in a convenient store. - a week after the robbery incident, one of her friends told the investigators that Jane secretly gave her big amount of cash while partying with their friends in Ibiza. Therefore, Jane robbed the bank. Deduction -Jane already has some criminal records particularly in bank robbery. -The group of syndicate responsible for the robbery is called the Jane's Co. --a notorious group of bank robbers who founded by Jane herself. -The CCTV Camera of the bank clearly catches the images of the robbers, and Jane is one of them. -Jane's mom had recorded from her cellphone the secret meeting with the robbers about their plan in robbing the bank. Therefore, Jane robbed the bank.
Wow, what a simple and effective explanation of the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning! I’ve just finished writing a paper for which I spent many hours rewriting the analysis and conclusion before finally having an ‘aha!’ moment. Afterwards, I was able to conect the dots and come up with a conjecture that I used in the conclusion in a deductive argument that proposed a need for further research to collect facts to confirm the conjecture. The key was finding the patterns. But I wasn’t fully aware of this thought process until I saw this video. Impressive!
Please recheck your deductive logic example. If there are other possibilities of a conclusion that is a sign the reasoning is INDUCTIVE. There are other ways the car could have a dent in it. Deductive is CERTAIN and no more than two possibilities for a conclusion. Inductive usually has three or more possibilities. Deductive reasoning does not have to have FACTS either. The conclusion is impossible to be false IF the premises were true. SOUND arguments deal with facts. Fact by definition is TRUE. if some claim has a false instance then it is NOT a FACT. There is no such thing as a false fact. You can have a FALSE opinion.
No. There's no real certainty, ever, even in logical reasoning. One can definitively deduct something and be wrong. In the opinion of whoever deducted McCain's guilt, there was enough evidence (for them) that there were no other possibilities. It's not a matter of opinion: it was their theorem, developed from their deduction, failed as it may be. Moreover, if fact by definition is true, then no human have authority to determine what is fact and what is not a fact, then there isn't actually a better example than the one presented.
Jane Robbed the Bank
Inductive:
-when she was in grade school, her parents were called by the principal for stealing her classmates' erasers and pencils on their bags.
-In junior high, she was arrested by the local police for shoplifting in a convenient store.
- a week after the robbery incident, one of her friends told the investigators that Jane secretly gave her big amount of cash while partying with their friends in Ibiza.
Therefore, Jane robbed the bank.
Deduction
-Jane already has some criminal records particularly in bank robbery.
-The group of syndicate responsible for the robbery is called the Jane's Co. --a notorious group of bank robbers who founded by Jane herself.
-The CCTV Camera of the bank clearly catches the images of the robbers, and Jane is one of them.
-Jane's mom had recorded from her cellphone the secret meeting with the robbers about their plan in robbing the bank.
Therefore, Jane robbed the bank.
GARAM JAHAD Thanks
Thank you!
Thanks , this will help me in my exams
Wow, what a simple and effective explanation of the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning! I’ve just finished writing a paper for which I spent many hours rewriting the analysis and conclusion before finally having an ‘aha!’ moment. Afterwards, I was able to conect the dots and come up with a conjecture that I used in the conclusion in a deductive argument that proposed a need for further research to collect facts to confirm the conjecture. The key was finding the patterns. But I wasn’t fully aware of this thought process until I saw this video. Impressive!
Please recheck your deductive logic example. If there are other possibilities of a conclusion that is a sign the reasoning is INDUCTIVE. There are other ways the car could have a dent in it. Deductive is CERTAIN and no more than two possibilities for a conclusion. Inductive usually has three or more possibilities. Deductive reasoning does not have to have FACTS either. The conclusion is impossible to be false IF the premises were true. SOUND arguments deal with facts. Fact by definition is TRUE. if some claim has a false instance then it is NOT a FACT. There is no such thing as a false fact. You can have a FALSE opinion.
No. There's no real certainty, ever, even in logical reasoning. One can definitively deduct something and be wrong. In the opinion of whoever deducted McCain's guilt, there was enough evidence (for them) that there were no other possibilities. It's not a matter of opinion: it was their theorem, developed from their deduction, failed as it may be. Moreover, if fact by definition is true, then no human have authority to determine what is fact and what is not a fact, then there isn't actually a better example than the one presented.
was here because of the subject. mathematics in the modern world :D
What does susi think about the occurance
GREAT EXAMPLE,
Thanks!!!!!!!
Taking notes
Itu cara bahasa inggris nya ia