The assigned material for today introduces you to what Logicians call ‘inductive reasoning’. Whereas ‘deductive reasoning’ requires a necessary connection from premise(s) to conclusion, ‘inductive reasoning’ requires a probable connection from premise(s) to conclusion. The reading from Weston introduces you to several kinds of inductive argument: i. Arguments by Example, ii. Arguments by Analogy, iii. Arguments from Authority, and iv. Arguments about Causes. Having studied the reading and the assigned video, you will:
1. Be able to give your own examples of a deductive argument and an inductive argument.
2. Be able to identify bad (“fallacious”) inductive arguments and the terminology used to name or describe these kinds of mistakes.
3. Be able to give your own ‘strong’ (or even better, ‘cogent’) inductive argument regarding something, or someone, you care about.
READ THIS:
Philosophical Text: Anthony Weston, A Rulebook for Arguments (5th edition), chapters 2-5
Consider the following questions, write your responses in your journal, and talk about them with a friend:
1. Having now re-read the article “Join Wall Street, Save the World,” try to identify different argument structures. What kinds of argument do you find in it? What are the premises, what is the conclusion?
2. How might understanding deductive and inductive arguments help you to foster better disagreements with others?
3. Why might human beings be invested in constructing arguments? What contexts of human life are benefitted by the use of argument(s) and the evaluation of argument(s)? What kinds of things might be at stake, for someone, regarding the success or failure of their argument(s)?