PHIL 210 Study Guide - Quiz Guide: Inductive Reasoning, Logical Form, Modus Tollens
46 views2 pages
PHIL 210-Critical Thinking
Chapter 2 Evidence Adds Up
Study notes 11
➢ The basic Structure is Disjunctive Syllogism (either P or Q; not P; Therefore Q)
o But the conclusion is not presented as true. It is simply presented as the likelier of the
o The argument is based on implicit inductive evidence: that one has more to lose by
lying than the other while the other has no reason to lie. Doesn’t mention possibility of
o This is common interrelation of Deductive and Inductive Arguments, where a valid
argument form (deductive) provides guidelines of the argument and the evidential
(inductive) reasoning is called on to defend the premises.
➢ Inference to the Best Explanation: An instance of Abductive Reasoning, where a new
hypothesis for previously known facts change the high-order of facts. This changed high-order
of facts plus previously known facts are the premises for the new conclusion
➢ Abductive Reasoning: a term used to mean a leapt to a conclusion that unifies, explains, or
rationalizes a set of facts. Unlike inductive reasoning it doesn’t have a “more or the same”
judgement about unobserved cases. But similar to inductive reasoning, it is Ampliative.
o Ex: Bob brings his car to mechanic, tell him theres a noise. For mechanic to fix the
problem, he needs to find the problem. So he will gather info from Bob asking him
questions, he will run tests, check different components, smells, pressures, etc to have
a set of data. Using Abducting Reasoning, large set of data in hand, he will consider
and reject hypothesis until he hits one that makes particularly good sense of (some of
the key subsets) of the data.
➢ Abducting Argument: To justify the Abductive Argument; “this hypothesis is the best available
explanation for these particularly significant facts, so, given those facts, this hypothesis is
reasonable to believe/act upon, at least”
Context of Discovery and Context of Justification
➢ Flashes of insight “aha!” or “Eureka!” moments are simply a source of potential solutions and
➢ When Abductive Judgements are correct they are not recognized through an “aha!” process.
Instead they are recognized by the systematic, conscious, and explicit forms of reasoning
mentioned in the mechanic example
o Context of Discovery: any number of arational, accidental, and sheer-dumb luck
explanations for someone have the “Eureka!” “aha!” moment.