Reasoning

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Reasoning can be defined in different ways, depending on whether it is used the context of idealist philosophy or logic and argument. Within idealist philosophical contexts, reasoning is "the mental process that informs our imagination, perceptions, thoughts, and feelings with whatever intelligibility these might have."[citation needed] Thus, reasoning links experience with universal meaning. In terms of logic and argument, reasoning is "the act of using reason to derive a conclusion from certain premises, using a given methodology."[citation needed] The two most commonly used explicit methods of reasoning are deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning; abductive reasoning and analogy are also forms of reasoning used in this context.

Contents

[edit] Types of reasoning in logic and argument

In deductive reasoning, a conclusion follows as a matter of course if unqualified premises (i.e., neither true nor false, but merely are) are used. The conclusion is conventionally considered to be non-false. This method of reasoning holds that the conclusion is inherent in the premises. Deductive reasoning does not increase one's knowledge base, and so is said to be non-ampliative. Classic examples of deductive reasoning are found in such syllogisms as the following:

  1. All men are mortal.
  2. Socrates is a man.
  3. Ergo, Socrates is mortal.

In inductive reasoning, on the other hand, when the premises are true, then the conclusion follows with some degree of probability as a result. This method of reasoning is ampliative--it gives more information than was contained in the premises themselves. A classical example comes from the empiricist David Hume:

  1. The sun has risen in the east every morning up until now.
  2. Ergo the sun will also rise in the east tomorrow.

A third method of reasoning is called abductive reasoning, or inference. This method is more complex in its structure and can involve both inductive and deductive arguments. What separates abduction from the other forms of reasoning is an attempt to favor one conclusion above others, by attempting to falsify alternative explanations or by demonstrating the likelihood of the favored conclusion, given a set of more or less disputable assumptions.

A fourth method of reasoning is analogy. Reasoning by analogy goes from a particular to another particular. The conclusion of an analogy is only plausible. Analogical reasoning is very frequent in common sense, science, philosophy and the humanities, but sometimes it is accepted only as an auxiliary method. A refined approach is case-based reasoning. For more information on inferences by analogy, see Juthe, 2005.

[edit] IQ versus EQ

Human reasoning capabilities are divided into three areas:[citation needed]

  • Logical reasoning
  • Non-logical reasoning (e.g. languages or feelings)
  • Mathematical reasoning

The IQ (Intelligence Quotient) for example, measured with non-language tests, is a measure of logical and mathematical reasoning skills. The EQ (Education Quotient) depends on non-logical reasoning capabilities. While every human being has basic capability in these three areas[citation needed], education, environment and genetics affect the extent to which these abilities can be developed.

[edit] See also

[edit] References

  • Vincent F. Hendricks, Thought 2 Talk: A Crash Course in Reflection and Expression, New York: Automatic Press / VIP, 2005, ISBN 87-991013-7-8
  • Scriven, Michael, "Reasoning", McGraw-Hill, 1976, ISBN 0-07-055882-5
  • Zarefsky, David. "Formal and Informal Argument: Lecture 3," Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning Part I, The Teaching Company.
  • Zarefsky, David. "Reasoning from Parts to Whole: Lecture 10," Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning Part I, The Teaching Company.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../r/e/a/Reasoning.html"