China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
The Choice for Sustainability
Published in Jean Russ, Sustainability and Design Ethics, 2018
Once scientists have collected their observations, they have to determine what those observations mean. This requires the scientists to draw inferences from the data based on logical reasoning. Deductive reasoning is logically valid. It is the fundamental method used in mathematical proofs. Deductive reasoning proceeds from the general rule to the particular, whereas inductive reasoning proceeds from the particular to a general rule. In inductive reasoning, we say a general principle is true because all of the examples or samples we have seen are true. Of course, inductive logic is not logically valid, because the limited number of observation is insufficient to guarantee a general rule. But inductive logic is consistently used in science and even in day-to-day life.
Greening engineering and embracing sustainability
Published in Riadh Habash, Green Engineering, 2017
Typically, two solution approaches are followed to investigate and solve scientific problems, the deductive approach and the inductive approach. Inductive approach is sometimes called the “bottom-up” approach, which depends on creative insight into observed phenomena, and may be more applicable to creating new solutions or analysis methods related to sustainable design (McIsaac and Morey 1998). Two Nobel laureates, Barbara McClintock and Albert Einstein, employed inductive and collaborative approaches using research questions to narrow the scope of their qualitative research study. Furthermore, both researchers stressed the need for a connection to living ecosystems. Figure 1.13 shows the difference between deductive (water-fall) and inductive (hill-climbing) reasoning approaches. Induction is usually described as moving from the specific to the general, while deduction begins with the general and ends with the specific. Arguments based on laws, rules, and accepted principles are generally used for deductive reasoning; however, observations tend to be used for inductive arguments.
The History of Intelligent Machines
Published in Alex Martynenko, Andreas Bück, Intelligent Control in Drying, 2018
The ability to learn depends on the mode of reasoning, which could be either deductive or inductive. Deductive reasoning requires following rules, whereas inductive reasoning creates rules from experience. The choice depends mostly on computer memory. A computer with a small memory could accomplish its tasks by following a finite set of rules. The memory store would only need to store these rules. If a task or purpose changed, the memory could be flushed of the old rules and given the required new ones. Such a machine would still be intelligent and able to accomplish its task. It would not, however, be a learning machine and would not be able to evolve in its procedures or purposes.
Exploring the efficacy of video game training in developing adolescent reasoning abilities
Published in Behaviour & Information Technology, 2023
Carlos Merino-Campos, Héctor del-Castillo, Isabel Pascual-Gómez
In logic, deductive reasoning represents an argument in which the conclusion is necessarily inferred from the premises (Sternberg, Guyote, and Turner 2021). In its formal definition, a deduction obtains a finite sequence of formulas, of which the previous one is designated at the conclusion (the conclusion of the deduction). All the formulas in the sequence are either axioms, assumptions, or direct inferences from previous formulas using rules of inference. In short, it is to comprehend something based on an argument (Hillig and Müller 2021).
Assessing the benefits of serious games to support sustainable decision-making for transboundary watershed governance
Published in Canadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques, 2018
Alison Furber, Wietske Medema, Jan Adamowski
The logical question then is, how might these more modest goals be achieved? How can robust and adaptable solutions be identified? How can complex systems be steered away from dangerous states? Without the possibility of applying deductive reasoning to decision-making processes, the next best option is inductive reasoning (Arthur 1994). While the goal of deductive reasoning is to draw conclusions that must be true provided the premises upon which they are based are true, the goal of inductive reasoning is to draw conclusions that are probably true if the premises are true. Inductive reasoning is a process in which the decision maker searches for patterns within their observations upon which to draw general conclusions, and as such is about learning from experience (Li 1992). Resource managers often employ inductive reasoning processes either consciously or unconsciously; for example, each time they make a decision based on their own mental model of a system in question, or when they draw a comparison between the current problem and a problem they have seen in the past, they are doing so. How good these decisions are in the long run, will depend on how much experience the decision maker has, and how similar the experience to the question at hand. Two avenues for improving inductive reasoning processes in water resources management are proposed: (1) increasing the experience of resource managers in managing the particular systems in question could improve their mental models of the system and lead to better decision-making; (2) inductive reasoning processes are widely applied in decision-making, but usually informally; formalisation of the process to make more explicit the evidence upon which decisions are based and the degree of confidence in the general conclusions drawn could increase the legitimacy of the use of inductive reasoning and the decision produced.
Guidelines for braindraw conduction: looking at braindraw under the lens of abduction and semiotics
Published in Behaviour & Information Technology, 2021
Jean C. S. Rosa, Pedro D. Valente, Leonardo Costa, Nuno J. Nunes, Ecivaldo de Souza Matos
The abductive reasoning developed by the philosopher C. S. Peirce is different from the traditional logical reasoning of deduction and induction. In deductive reasoning, the conclusion is triggered by a set of premises. In inductive reasoning, patterns are speculated from observations. On the other hand, abductive reasoning starts with explaining explanations or resolutions for some practical issues and selecting the best one. Therefore, abduction can be considered the general process of invention (Flach and Kakas 2000).