Lecture 7: 1 February 2013
1. But first a little tutorial on inference
a. Inference is drawing conclusions from data of the world. You see something, you infer
something. McIntosh is big on intellectual tests that have components of inference in
2. Inferential reasoning: deduction and induction
a. Deduction goes from general to specific. You come up with a theory, then hypothesis,
observation and finally confirmation. Top down theory
b.Induction goes from specific to general. It goes from observation, pattern, and tentative
hypothesis and then to theory. This is a bottom up approach
3. Clearly from an empirical point either…
a. Relativity turned out to be a correct theory. But Copernicus‟ induction theory turned out
to be wrong.
b.No difference in truth-value between induction and deduction as a scientific theory.
c. Top down cognition- our representation of the world, our understanding of causal
reasoning comes from theories from our mind (center) that informs all our cognitions. It
fits with the notion that you are born with central abilities.
d.Bottom up cognitions- comes from the environment. Our experience generates our
knowledge and representation of the world. You can change the environment and thus,
4. Philosophers make a different distinction based on truth
a. The difference between deductive and inductive reasoning is a difference in the degree
of truth of the premises
b.Premises are initial assumption and an inference/conclusion
c. A deductive argument is just an argument. You can never prove truth of premises. (This
is why „thought‟ is in bold). It is deterministic- a set of premises that determine a single,
d.Example goes from general to specific
5. It is not the form of the argument but…
a. Example is a deductive argument. It may be wrong.
b.You can turn the example into an inductive argument= if most men are chauvinistic pigs
and Socrates is a man, then he is likely to be a chauvinistic pig
a. No form here either
7. A deductive argument going from specific to general…
a. Premise one isn‟t a generality. It is the entire population- the Williams family. It doesn‟t
include the Smith family or the Jones family.
b.There is nothing wrong with the argument. It‟s the form that‟s the issue
8. An inductive argument going from general to specific
a. It‟s an inductive argument- it doesn‟t mean it will snow. There is no explanation there.
9. Mathematical induction…
a. An example of mathematical induction
10. Slide with an example of mathematical induction (we don‟t need to do any)
11. Back to crystallized intelligence a. Processing speed was incorrectly thought to be composed of a non-cognitive ability that
explained all of intelligence (neural efficiency and what it measures)
a. It also weights on general intelligence
b.People‟s vocabulary is gradually getting better.
c. One of the issues of the WAIS (and othe