Questions tagged [deduction]

The tag has no usage guidance.

Filter by
Sorted by
Tagged with
0 votes
1 answer
93 views

Proof of soundness of the rule of implication introduction in natural deduction calculus

From the definition of a sound calculus we can infer that a sound implication introduction has to have the form: Γ ⊢ A → Γ ⊨ A. The rule for implication introduction goes (Γ ∪ {A} ⊢ B) ⊢ (Γ ⊢ A → B). ...
Pippen's user avatar
  • 147
0 votes
0 answers
44 views

I have taken my midterm exam 1 hour ago, and I am confused about some question meaning

1 what is the defferenece between "the justification of line 6" and "the application of xx on line 6"? For example, we can find that in the line 6, the application is wrong because ...
XYZ's user avatar
  • 1
0 votes
0 answers
26 views

abductive reasoning in many fields of study

In continuation of the discussion What is the relation between abductive reasoning and fallacy? my question is that if medical science judiciary history all uses abductive reasoning (almost all the ...
quanity's user avatar
  • 1,263
1 vote
1 answer
47 views

Question about disjunction elimination in Fitch

I was recently using https://proofs.openlogicproject.org/ and realized that their version disjunction elimination is fairly restrictive. I had a proof set up something like this: p∨q (Premise) p∨r (...
PW_246's user avatar
  • 985
0 votes
1 answer
35 views

Is backtesting inductive reasoning?

WE do backtesting in finance, that is we guess hypotheses/premises and then use previous data to verify it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backtesting. https://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/backtesting....
quanity's user avatar
  • 1,263
0 votes
2 answers
115 views

Internal vs External Statement in Homotopy Type Theory

I would like to clarify the precise difference between the phrases "statement inside/ internal the theory" and "statement about the theory" in context of Homotopy Type Theory. A ...
user267839's user avatar
1 vote
2 answers
60 views

Does the claim of an is/ought gap presuppose relevance logic (at least for morality-talk)?

Imagine Hume's remarks but with reference to the usual disjunction introduction: In every system of conjunction, which I have hitherto met with, I have always remarked, that the author proceeds for ...
Kristian Berry's user avatar
2 votes
3 answers
123 views

Parmenides and deductions about existence

I am beginner in philosophy and have some problem following this paragraph: "From the premise that something exists (“It is”), Parmenides deduces that it cannot also not exist (“It is not”), as ...
user avatar
0 votes
1 answer
54 views

Double-negation deduction rule in https://proofs.openlogicproject.org/

How can we use double-negation deduction rule? For example, ~~p is the same as p. I am not able to find how to eliminate ~~ in https://proofs.openlogicproject.org/
DEE_GEE's user avatar
0 votes
1 answer
53 views

Inference as tentative deduction

I've heard people make confident assertions about the categorical distinction between inference and deduction, but I'm not convinced. I'm curious to hear rebuttals to the assertion that "...
Robin Andrews's user avatar
0 votes
0 answers
97 views

Modus Ponens false premises

I just started to get into deductive reasoning and was wondering how to prove an argument to be false. In Modus Ponens: If P then Q P thus, Q If I had an argument like this: P1) If you wear a tin ...
pythonman's user avatar
3 votes
1 answer
113 views

Possible vs may (or impossible vs cannot) in Aristotle's Prior Analytics

In chapter 13 of the Prior Analytics, it is written that "it is evident if it is possible for A to apply to B, it is also possible for it not to apply". Which naively speaking makes sense, ...
S11n's user avatar
  • 135
1 vote
0 answers
126 views

speculative deductive reasoning

Is hypothetico-deductive reasoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetico-deductive_model and speculative deductive reasoning same ? (speculative deductive reasoning- WE arrive at the explanans ...
quanity's user avatar
  • 1,263
0 votes
0 answers
40 views

Defeasible reasoning

a. If x is a weekday, Xena goes to work on day x. b. If Xena is ill, she doesn’t go to work that day. c.2 Jan ‘07 was a weekday. d. Xena was ill on 2 Jan. '07. e. By (a) and (c), Xena went to work on ...
quanity's user avatar
  • 1,263
1 vote
3 answers
292 views

Types of reasoning in mathematics

Can we say that analytical approaches is deductive reasoning and numerical approaches(numerical analysis) is inductive reasoning ?
quanity's user avatar
  • 1,263
18 votes
6 answers
9k views

If math is so deductive, why is it so hard to discover new math?

Some considerations: The conclusions of much latter/new math may be said to be already existent within the premises of current math The importance of deduction changes depending on if math is said ...
Xeon's user avatar
  • 481
0 votes
1 answer
87 views

Falsification of a statement

Is falsification only applicable to deductive reasoning (as opposed to inductive, abductive and speculative deductive reasoning)?
quanity's user avatar
  • 1,263
5 votes
6 answers
1k views

What is the relationship between algorithms and logic?

Is an algorithm (cooking a dish, Grover's/Shor algorithm, etc.) a form of deductive reasoning or inductive reasoning, and if not what exactly is the relationship between an alogorithm and logic?
quanity's user avatar
  • 1,263
1 vote
0 answers
51 views

Logic reasoning problems books

Could you, please, recommend any books with a set of logic problems or exercises on deductive and inductive reasoning, syllogism. Something that contains a set of questions, such as It is known that ...
Liz's user avatar
  • 11
0 votes
1 answer
56 views

Natural Deduction Proof with double quantifier (predicate logic) [closed]

Premise: (∃y)(∀x)(Px v Py) Conclusion: ~(∀y)(~Py) I'm starting out assuming the negation, i.e., (∀y)(~Py). But then I'm unsure how to find a contradiction within that subderivation. Here's what I've ...
qwerty1005's user avatar
3 votes
1 answer
91 views

How do I apply the reduction to absurdity rule in the Open Logic natural deduction tool?

I'm using the open logic natural deduction tool (https://proofs.openlogicproject.org/) as it makes writing proofs very clear and clean but I can't seem to apply the reduction to absurdity rule ...
daniel's user avatar
  • 31
0 votes
3 answers
168 views

Causation with Inductive/Deductive Logic

I'm sofa-philosopher and I have a case I can't quite dismantle. My friend (let's call him John) just made a statement that I find philosophically weak, and I'd like to run it thru you guys. So, John ...
Pompair's user avatar
  • 113
1 vote
2 answers
380 views

Is mathematical induction deduction, and if so, why is it so named?

By induction, I mean this screenshot from this Youtube video Abduction as an Aspect of Retroduction | Chiasson, Phyllis | Commens Induction: The prefix “in,” also from the Latin has to do with ...
user avatar
1 vote
1 answer
222 views

Does 1. extra-, 2. intra-polation fall under abduction, induction or deduction?

How does extrapolation relate to abduction, deduction, and/or induction? Scilicet, does abduction, deduction, and/or induction fully encompass Extrapolation? Same question for Interpolation. I ...
user avatar
1 vote
1 answer
124 views

Can we use an impossible condition as a premise in a sound argument?

This is going to appear a bit of a mess Can we use a syllogism with an impossible condition as a premise in a sound argument? I am trying to reconstruct an argument. My interlocutor assumes you cannot ...
user avatar
0 votes
0 answers
46 views

What can be known and what can be believed when neither induction nor deduction is justified?

Kant is well known for taking seriously the lack of justification for induction voiced by Hume and finding what is left for us to be able to know and believe. I wonder, with the knowledge that the ...
Kniera Hoofd's user avatar
-1 votes
1 answer
97 views

Is there such a thing as inductive reasoning?

When I form hypotheses, don't I actually only use deduction instead of induction? Suppose I observe that the sun rises 5 days in a row, so I hypothesise that the sun rises every day. But for this I am ...
iwab's user avatar
  • 169
3 votes
3 answers
401 views

Deductively sound argument

Is there a way to prove that a deductively sound argument (where premises are true and arguments are valid) will always have a true conclusion?
Anke's user avatar
  • 31
2 votes
5 answers
583 views

How can syllogisms with contradictory premises be valid?

A syllogism is valid if it is impossible for the premises to be true and at the same time the conclusion to be false. Consider the following syllogism: P1: This apple is red. P2: This apple is not red....
John Smith's user avatar
3 votes
0 answers
45 views

Formal deduction of Whitehead's Philosophy of Organism

In Process and Reality Whitehead starts off the investigation by giving his categoreal scheme - different types of categories and their derivatives, as well as some axioms. If I understand correctly, ...
Yechiam Weiss's user avatar
0 votes
2 answers
279 views

Are the premises of deductive arg's. founded upon inductive cases?...help is what I am in need of

Let's take this example of a deductive argument: P1: Monkeys like bananas. P2: Lucy is a monkey. C: Therefore, Lucy likes bananas. Disregarding whether this argument is true or false, how does one ...
sometimes this sometimes that's user avatar
2 votes
3 answers
237 views

Does all deductive knowledge stem from inductive observation?

Given the premise that deductive reasoning needs a premise statement to get started, ultimately do these premises come from inductive observation? e.g. When the sun is out it’s daytime. The sun is out....
benbyford's user avatar
  • 121
44 votes
12 answers
17k views

Fallacy by Sherlock Holmes 'Eliminate the impossible, and what remains must be the truth'

In The Sign of Four, Holmes asks Watson: "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?" This may be ...
Mogli's user avatar
  • 467
0 votes
0 answers
604 views

Proof truth is absolute and not relative

First of all, I want to point out I am not any expert in philosophy, so this question is not based in no further readings, but only my own knowledge in logic. Imagine I want to proof the truth is ...
Theo Deep's user avatar
  • 113
1 vote
3 answers
206 views

Have I totally misunderstood conditionals all along?

I've been talking to a friend of mine about modus ponens (and modus tollens) and I'm wondering if I have totally misunderstood something fundamental about conditionals. Here are the two opposing ...
Roman Holiday's user avatar
0 votes
0 answers
67 views

Why is "an invalid argument, the conclusion of which is a tautology" not possible? [duplicate]

A similar version of this question was answered before, (An invalid argument, the conclusion of which is a tautology) but I'm still a bit confused about why this is not possible. Like the other asker, ...
L.I.K.'s user avatar
  • 1
0 votes
0 answers
88 views

Is it standard to distinguish two versions of the hypothetico-deductivist conception of science : confirmation approach and falsificationism?

In his course on Philosophy Of Science, Pr Folse ( Loyola University New Orleans) distinguishes two trends in the " empricist consensus " ( that emerged in the 19th century) : inductivism ...
Floridus Floridi's user avatar
2 votes
0 answers
91 views

Deductive methodology in philosophy

Introduction Mathematics uses deductive methodology to produce results called theorems that are indisputable truth by logical necessity, with respect to the axioms of the starting axioms and ...
Lilla's user avatar
  • 131
1 vote
0 answers
41 views

How to deduce V from (U → V ), (¬U→V) using Deduction theorem?

We have these axioms and modus ponens: Axiom 1 is: P→(Q→P) Axiom 2 is: (P→(Q→R))→((P→Q)→(P→R)) Axiom 3 is:(P→Q)→(¬Q→¬P) Modus ponens is: from P and P→Q infer Q Edit: I still couldn't solve it, so I ...
aneys's user avatar
  • 11
-1 votes
2 answers
118 views

Prove that the following is a logical truth (tautology) using a natural deduction derivation: (B → C) ˅ (¬B → C) [closed]

Prove that the following is a logical truth (tautology) using a natural deduction derivation: (B → C) ˅ (¬B → C) How do I prove this using statement logic? I know I need to start with a supposition ...
Muskaan Mehta's user avatar
2 votes
1 answer
162 views

Are inferences in everyday life often combinations of inductive, deductive and other possible methods of inference?

Logicians have distilled methods of inference into some fundamental kinds like deduction and induction. In everyday conversation, though, we are constantly making inferences both inductively and ...
Sunreeta Bhattacharya's user avatar
-2 votes
1 answer
45 views

How to prove: 1. (A^B)v(A^C) 2. (AvD) -> E //E

This proof has stumped me. It seems that getting (AvD) alone then using Modens ponens to therefore prove E would be the correct way of going about things but I cannot seem to find a way to get (AvD) ...
Jimmy's user avatar
  • 9
0 votes
1 answer
71 views

Intro Natural Deduction Problem: Given premise (p -> q) -> p show p using deduction

This is from the Daniel Bonevac Deduction text, page 122 #12. Given premise (p -> q) -> p show p using deduction. I can do this using made up rules on steps 4+5, not given in the book. The other ...
clay's user avatar
  • 103
5 votes
1 answer
969 views

Why does Gensler's Star Test not work on some syllogisms? [duplicate]

All teachers are intelligent. All teachers are well-paid. From the Star Test, we can deduce that the argument must be invalid with whatever conclusion (according to the classical syllogism figures), ...
user avatar
2 votes
1 answer
113 views

Counterfactuals in Premises for Arguments

Can counterfactuals in premises make an argument sound and valid? I understand that soundness requires both validity and true premises whilst validity requires the premises to follow to the conclusion....
farce's user avatar
  • 21
-3 votes
3 answers
270 views

Deductive reasoning & conditionals

What would be a good example of explicit deductive reasoning that doesn't seem to be possibly interpreted correctly as a conditional (If A, then B)?
Speakpigeon's user avatar
  • 6,908
-1 votes
1 answer
177 views

Hey all can you help prove the following from Garson's ML for Philosophers: [closed]

Exercise 1.7 (e) Modal Logic For Philosophers 2nd edition: []p v []q/[](p v q) {hint: set-up vout first} I would appreciate it if you can solve it using the methods laid out by Garson (PL+[]in+[]out)...
ryan's user avatar
  • 24
-1 votes
1 answer
139 views

In a deductive reasoning system, what happens if we have unfounded axioms? [closed]

What if our axioms are false? What happens then?
asdfasfasdgf's user avatar
0 votes
1 answer
243 views

Classification of deductive reasoning types

Please, could you help me make sense of/classify types of deductive reasoning? When studying mathematical logical, I have noticed there is this Hilbert's axiomatic system (Hilbert calculus) with its ...
TKN's user avatar
  • 355
5 votes
2 answers
569 views

Are all non-deductive arguments inductive?

I am having troubles with understanding this question. Can someone give me an example/insight about where to go from here?
efe's user avatar
  • 51