Inductive versus deductive reasoning: how to make stronger arguments
According to the Falsification Principle of Karl Popper, we cannot prove the validity of a hypothesis. We can only disprove it.
However, we can get closer to the truth by improving our knowledge, using inductive or deductive reasoning. Both are based on evidence, but provide different ways of evaluating the facts.
SIMILAR ARTICLES & IDEAS:
The reason people jump to conclusions is the fact that they find it easy.
Fact-checking and 100 percent accuracy on everything they see or observe consume way too much time for a normal person.
Taking mental shortcuts is the path most people choose to jump to conclusions.
How should we evaluate arguments that people make to persuade us? And how should we construct our own arguments to be the most effective?
At its core, an argument consists of a conclus...
It does not use reasons that contradict each other, contradict the conclusion or explicitly or implicitly assumes the truth of the conclusion. Checklist:
A premise is relevant if it provides some bearing on the truth of the conclusion. Checklist:
It is a logical fallacy and it happens when we choose and focus only on evidence that supports our views and arguments while ignoring anything that may contradict us.
Also referred to as Bernoulli’s maxim, it states that, when assessing the probability that a certain hypothesis is true, we must take into account all the available information.