The type of reasonings that are being covered are Reasoning by Analogy, Sign Reasoning, Casual Reasoning, Reasoning by Criteria, Reasoning by Example, Inductive, and Deductive.
According to Epstein, a comparison becomes reasoning by analogy when it is part of an argument: On one side of the comparison we draw a conclusion, so on the other side we should conclude the same. For example, All humans eat. Michael Jordan is a human. Therefore, Michael Jordan eats.
Sign Reasoning asserts that two or more things are so closely related that the presence or absence of one indicates the presence or absence of the other. For example, the house floor is wet; they must have mopped earlier.
Casual Reasoning is when we have good reason to believe that events of one sort (the causes) are systematically related to events of some other sort (the effects). For example, my friend has sprained ankle. He was probably landed on someone's foot playing basketball.
Reasoning by Criteria starts by defining the criteria by which the outcome of a decision will be judged, and then identify the best decision, given these constraints. For example, Jason wants to eat something heavy for dinner, maybe a steak would be good for him.
Reasoning by example is using examples in a argument. You should start exercising and eat more lean foods if you want to lose weight and tone up. My friend lost ridicoulous weight by doing it.
Inductive is a form of inference producing propositions about unobserved objects or types, either specifically or generally, based on previous observation. For example, The sun rises in the east every morning. Therefore, the sun will also rise in the east tomorrow.
Deductive is which constructs or evaluates deductive arguments which conclusion follows necessarily from the premises. For example, Akira is a Husky. Husky barks. Therefore, Akira barks.
For me I had the hardest time understanding causal reasoning. I like what you said about causal reasoning. "Casual Reasoning is when we have good reason to believe that events of one sort (the causes) are systematically related to events of some other sort (the effects)." This was very helpful for me to understand how causal reasoning works. Your example gives a cause which was that your friend sprained his ankle. Then you gave an effect for that cause which was that he most likely sprained it playing basketball. The way you described causal reasoning and how you stated your example really helped define it for me.
ReplyDeleteThis post is very interesting. The examples that you used were right on point however; I personally would have liked a more personal and more relaxed definitions of the types of reasoning. The most noticeable example of yours was the Causal Reasoning. I noticed after reading this chapter that I have a habit of reasoning causally; almost like I am trying to be “Captain Obvious” and exaggerate the effect with a general cause. I feel like this reasoning can be in comparison to Sign Reasoning because just by looking at the ankle injury, we could assume the injury was caused by something other than landing on a foot.
ReplyDeleteI really like you post. It gives a short and simple explanation of the reasoning along with an explanation!!! I like your examples used because they are easy to relate to, which in return helps anyone reading this understand what we are supposed to learn from each definition and example.
ReplyDelete