Term
|
Definition
| assumptions about what is true and factual that are sometimes states and sometimes implied, these assumptions are often taken for granted. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the process of finding truth and making observations, these observations may be from statistical polling, controlled experiments, or relevant examples and analogies. the process of finding truth by making observations, inferring general laws and truths from specific instances. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the process of inferring a conclusion by putting forth true premises in a valid format. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an argument that follows formal patterns of reasoning and is aimed at establishing the certainty of a conclusion through presenting true premises in valid form. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an argument structured in a correct deductive format, an argument structured in such a way that if premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a valid deductive argument whose premises are true. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a deductive argument usually consisting of two premises and a conclusion. usually written in three steps.moves logically from a major and minor premise to a conclusion. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the statement in a syllogism that sets forth a general principle. (the major premise contains the term that is the predicate of the conclusion) all men are mortal |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the statement in a syllogism that expresses an instance of the principle set out in the major premise. (the minor premise contains the term that is the subject of the conclusion) Socrates is a man. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| in deductive reasoning the inference drawn from the major and minor premises of a syllogism (therefore Socrates is mortal) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a statement in which members of one class are said to be included in another class. this statement may be used as the major premise of a syllogism. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| in deductive reasoning a syllogism whose major premise asserts that if the condition cited on the first part of a statement is true, then the claim cited in the second part of the statement will follow. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a valid conditional/hypothetical syllogism in which the antecedent is affirmed. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a syllogism in which the major premise presents a condition (if A then B) or a possibility (either A or B) that is resolved in the minor premise so that a valid conclusion can follow. the condition or possibility is resolved in the minor premise in the form of affirmation or denial. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a valid conditional/hypothetical syllogism in which the consequent is denied. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a form of argument that builds and depends on a series of conditions being met. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a hypothetical syllogism in which two possibilities are given in the major premise and one is assumed to be necessarily true. in the minor premise one of the possible alternatives is negated and the remaining alternative is then affirmed in the conclusion. either A or B not B therefore A |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a valid syllogism that seeks to logically rule out various possibilities until only a single possibility remains. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a syllogism with a key part or parts implied rather than directly stated. the ssunptions of the speaker or writer. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| evidence offered to prove a claim. statistics, examples, research, physical evidence, logical reasoning and expert opinion |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| classifying people places or things solely on common traits while ignoring individual differences that make these comparisons invalid. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the premise of a deductive argument that is under dispute. this is also often called the contentious premise. (you did it..no i didn't yes you did) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| often called inductive reasoning...the process of drawing generalizations from known facts or research to give strength and support to conclusions. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| data collected by polling and research studies that can be used to make statistical generalizations |
|
|
Term
| statistical generalizations |
|
Definition
| inferences drawn from statistical evidence that are used to give strength to inductive arguments. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the specific question that a researcher seeks to answer concerning a given population |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| the group set about which a researcher wishes to generalize. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| members of the target population who are studied by a researcher. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a quality of a research sample in which the sample has the same significant characteristics in the same proportion as the target population. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a sample that does not reflect a random, representative population, a biased sample does not provide adequate evidence to support a conclusion. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a condition that allows every member of a target population to have a equal chance of being chosen as part of the sample. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| generalizations based on casual factors. that is they state a particular factor is responsible for a specific effect. these generalizations are used to strengthen inductive arguments. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a condition (state of affairs, thing, process) that must be present if a particular effect is present. equivalently if the necessary condition is absent then the effect cannot occur. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a condition (state of affairs thing) that automatically leads to the production of another event. if the condition is present then the event will definitely occur. the sufficient condition creates or causes the effect. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a combination of causes that are presumed to lead to a specific effect. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a casual factor that immediately precedes the effect. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| factors or conditions that led up to but did not immediately precede the effect. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a theory of causation postulating that the cause of an effect is found by nothing that X is the only factor always present when Y (the problem or the good effect) occurs therefore X causes Y..if all people eat the same chicken but different sides and all become sick the chicken caused them to be sick. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| a theory of causation postulating that the cause of an effect is found by noting that the only difference between the event of effect (called Y) happening or not happening is whether one element X is present. |
|
|
