Get help now

General Notion of Inference Sample

  • Pages 5
  • Words 1193
  • Views 381
  • dovnload

    Download

    Cite

  • Pages 5
  • Words 1193
  • Views 381
  • Academic anxiety?

    Get original paper in 3 hours and nail the task

    Get your paper price

    124 experts online

    I. SOME DEFINITIONS

    • INFERENCE = one of the ways to get at a truth.o COHERENCE THEORY OF TRUTH

    • INFERENCE ( wide sense ) = any procedure by which the head returns from one or more propositions to other propositions seen to be implied in the former.

    • INFERENCE ( rigorous sense ) = the operation by which the head gets new cognition by pulling out the deductions of what is already known.

    • INFERENCE = besides applied to any series of propositions so arranged that one. called the CONSEQUENT. flows with logical necessity from one or more others. called the ANTECEDENT.

    • ANTECEDENT ( Latin. antecedo ) = “that which goes before” o Defined as “that from which something is inferred”

    • CONSEQUENT ( Latin. consequor ) = “that which follows after” o Defined as “that which is inferred from the antecedent”

    • N. B.1. The ANTECEDENT AND CONSEQUENT of a VALID INFERENCE are so related that the TRUTH of the ANTECEDENT involves the Truth of the CONSEQUENT ( but non frailty versa ) .

    2. The FALSITY of the CONSEQUENT involves the FALSITY of the ANTECEDENT ( but non frailty versa ) .

    3. The connexion by virtuousness of which the consequent flows with LOGICAL NECESSITY from the ancestor is known as CONSEQUENCE or merely SEQUENCE.

    4. The SEQUENCE ( which is signified by the so called CONCLUSION INDICATORS. e. g. . hence. accordingly. consequently. hence. therefore. and so. for this ground. etc ) is the VERY HEART of INFERENCE ; and when we make an illation. our assent bears on it straight.

    • A GENUINE SEQUENCE is called VALID ; a PSEUDO SEQUENCE is called INVALID.

    SYNOPTIC SCHEMA

    ANTECEDENT ( premises )

    ( connexion betweenINFERENCE the ancestor andthe consequent )

    CONSEQUENT ( decision )

    FORMAL AND MATERIAL VALIDITY

    • FORMAL VALIDITY = the sequence springs from the signifier of illation o Example: Every S is a P ; hence some P is an S. O N. B. We can replace anything we want to for S and P. and the consequent will ever be true if the ancestor is true. o Example:

    ? S = Canis familiaris. P = animate being: Every Canis familiaris is an animate being ; therefore some animate being is a Canis familiaris. ? S = elector. P = citizen: Every elector is a citizen ; therefore some citizen is a elector.

    • MATERIAL VALIDITY = the sequence springs from the particular character of the idea content. o Example: Every trigon is a plane figure bounded by three consecutive lines ; hence every plane figure bounded by three consecutive lines is a trigon. o Analysis:

    ? The illation is officially invalid for the consequent does non flux from the ancestor because of the signifier ; but materially valid because it does flux from the ancestor due to the particular character of the idea content. ? “Plane figure bounded by three consecutive lines” is a definition of “triangle” and is hence interchangeable.

    Truth AND FORMAL VALIDITY

    • LOGICAL TRUTH = consists in the conformance of our heads with world. o A proposition. as explained. is true if things are as the proposition says they are. • Logic surveies ground as an instrument for geting truth. and the attainment of truth must of all time stay the ultimate purpose of the logistician.

    • N. B. We shall non be straight concerned with geting true informations but instead with conserving the truth of our informations as we draw illations from them. O In other words. we shall take at doing such a passage from informations to conclusion that if the information ( ancestor. premises ) are true. the decision ( consequent ) will needfully be true. O Formal cogency. rightness. uprightness. or consistence will be our immediate purpose. o We shall non inquire ourselves. ARE THE PREMISES TRUE? . but. DOES THE CONCLUSION FLOW FROM THE PREMISES so that IF the premises are true. the decision is needfully true? o The undermentioned syllogism is right in this proficient sense although the premises and the decision are false: ? No works is a life being ; but every adult male is a works ; hence no adult male is a life being. ? This syllogism is CORRECT FORMALLY.

    • Why: because the decision truly flows from the premises by virtuousness of the signifier or construction of the statement. IF the premises were true. the decision would besides be true. o The undermentioned syllogism is non right officially although the premises and the decision are true: ? Every Canis familiaris is an animate being ; but no Canis familiaris is a works ; therefore no works is an animate being. ? The syllogism is non right because the decision does non truly flux from the premises. ? For case. we substitute “plant” with “cow” : • Every Canis familiaris is an animate being ; but no Canis familiaris is a cow ; hence no cow is an animate being.

    IMMEDIATE AND MEDIATE INFERENCE

    ? IMMEDIATE INFERENCE = consists in go throughing straight ( that is. without the intermediacy of a in-between term or a 2nd proposition ) from one proposition to a new proposition that is a partial or complete reformulation of the really same truth expressed in the original proposition.

    ? MEDIATE INFERENCE = draws a decision from two propositions ( alternatively of one ) and does affect an progress in cognition. o It is mediate in either of two ways:? Categorical syllogism = it unites. or offprints. the topic and predicate of the decision through the intermediacy of a in-between term ; ? Conjectural syllogism = the major premiss “causes” the decision through the intermediacy of a 2nd proposition. o Goal: non merely a new proposition but besides a new truth ? There is an progress in cognition.

    |SYNOPSIS | |IMMEDIATE INFERENCE |MEDIATE INFERENCE | |A. base on ballss from one proposition |A. base on ballss from two propositions | |B. without a medium |B. through a medium | |C. to a new proposition but non to a new truth |C. non merely to a new proposition but besides to a new truth |

    DEDUCTION AND INDUCTION

    • DEDUCTION = the procedure by which our heads proceed from a more cosmopolitan truth to a less cosmopolitan truth. o Example:? All work forces are mortal ; but Peter is a adult male ; hence Peter is mortal.

    • INDUCTION = the procedure by which our heads proceed from sufficiently enumerated cases to a cosmopolitan truth. o Example:? This ruminant ( hoofed-mammal ) ( a cow ) is cloven-footed ; this one ( a cervid ) is cloven-footed ; and this one ( a caprine animal ) and this ( an antelope ) ; hence all ruminants are cloven-footed.

    VENN DIAGRAM

    • Aristotelean Standpoint = cosmopolitan propositions about bing things imply the being of the things talked about.o Example:o All Stephen King’s novels are thrillers.• Implies the being of at least one novel by Stephen King. ? All unicorns are one-horned animate beings.• Does non connote the being of unicorns. • Boolean Standpoint = cosmopolitan propositions ne’er imply the being of the things talked about. ? All Stephen King’s novels are thrillers. • Does non connote the being of any novels by Stephen King. ? All unicorns are one-horned animate beings.



    • Does non connote the being of unicorns. • Aristotelean and Boolean readings are the same for peculiar propositions. o Bot I and O propositions really claim that the capable category contains at least one bing thing. ? “Some” = at least one exists.

    SQUARE OF OPPOSITION[ movie ]• CONTRADICTION = can non be true and false at the same clip • CONTRARY = At least 1of the propositions is false.• SUBCONTRARY = At least 1of the propositions is true. • SUBALTERNATION = truth flows down ; falseness flows up.


    Beginning:

    Bachhuber. Andrew H. . S. J. Introduction to Logic. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Inc. . 1957.Sequence

    This essay was written by a fellow student. You may use it as a guide or sample for writing your own paper, but remember to cite it correctly. Don’t submit it as your own as it will be considered plagiarism.

    Need a custom essay sample written specially to meet your requirements?

    Choose skilled expert on your subject and get original paper with free plagiarism report

    Order custom paper Without paying upfront

    General Notion of Inference Sample. (2017, Jul 19). Retrieved from https://graduateway.com/general-notion-of-inference-essay-sample-1202/

    Hi, my name is Amy 👋

    In case you can't find a relevant example, our professional writers are ready to help you write a unique paper. Just talk to our smart assistant Amy and she'll connect you with the best match.

    Get help with your paper
    We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy