Inductive Reasoning Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Inductive Reasoning - Essay ExampleInstead, a correct solution is achieved by applying a normatively appropriate rule f inference. Normative systems argon a lot applied to formal reasoning problems in order to define solutions as right or wrong, such that these problems are then construed as tests f correct and fallacious reasoning. Hence, these problems are designed to measure the result to which participants bring to the laboratory an understanding - and ability to apply - the relative normative principles.In the case f deductive reasoning research, the relevant normative system is formal system of logic. Participants are given some expound and asked whether a conclusion follows. Under strict deductive reasoning book of instructions, they are told (a) to assume that the premises are true and (b) to draw or approve only conclusions that necessarily follow. As observed elsewhere (Evans, 2002), this astray used method was developed over 40 years ago when mental picture in log ic as a normative and descriptive system for human reasoning was very much high than it is today. In spite f the method, much evidence has emerged to support the conclusion that pragmatic factors play a large part in human reasoning. We say in spite of because standard deductive instructions aim to suppress precisely those factors that dominate informal reasoning the introduction f prior belief and the expression f uncertainty in premises and conclusions.In research on statistical inference, a similar story is found. People are asked to make statistical inference on the basis f well-defined problems, in which relevant probabilities or frequency distributions are provided, and their answers are assessed for correctness against the norms provided by the chance calculus. Research in this tradition has been mostly conducted by researchers in the heuristics and biases tradition inspired by the spirt f Danny Kahneman and Amos Tversky (Gilovich, Griffin, & Kahneman, 2002 Kahneman, Slovi c, & Tversky, 1982). This results in an arguably negative research strategy that is similar to much work on deductive reasoning. That is, researchers show primarily what people cannot do (conform to the principles f logic or probability theory) and only secondarily address what people actually do.Indeed, one f the most common explanations for why intelligent, amend individuals often fail to reason normatively is that they use informal reasoning processes to solve formal reasoning tasks. For example, that instructions to the contrary, reasoners often supplement the information they are provided with background knowledge and beliefs, and make inferences that are consonant with, earlier than necessitated by, the premises. If this is the case, it is reasonable to suggest that we study these processes directly, by giving our participants tasks that allow them to express these types f behaviours freely, rather than indirectly, via the observation f poor performance on a formal task. ( Vallee-Tournageau 2005)The argument for doing so becomes take down more compelling when it is understood that performance on any given reasoning task