You should be able to answer all of these questions. Try to post a few here to have a brief conversation.
1) What should we trust scientists?
2) What's deductive reasoning? Inductive reasoning?
3) Explain the examples of the Frenchman & wine; mice & cheese; the sun rising in the morning.
4) What's Hume's problem of induction?
5) Explain "inference to the best explanation"
6) Describe at least two definitions of probability. Why is it important to know about different interpretations of probability?
Deductive reasoning says if the premises of an inference are true, then the conclusion must be true as well. Inductive reasoning differs in that we assume the conclusion to always be true. For example, if we take 100 light bulbs and the first 99 work fine, we make the inference that the 100th light bulb will work as well. Hume had a problem with this inductive way of thinking. Hume argued that we assumed UN or the "uniformity of nature". His problem was that it was physically impossible to prove the uniformity of nature, which made inductive reasoning very dangerous.
ReplyDelete2) Deduction is an appropriate relation between premises and a conclusion. If the premises are true, the conclusion must be true too. Induction moves from premises about objects we have examined to conclusions about objects we haven't examined, in which the conclusion can be false.
ReplyDelete4) Hume's argues that induction cannot be rationally justified, because we presuppose the "uniformity of nature". We depend on the assumption that objects we haven't examined will be similar to that we have examined, but we cannot argue that nature will continue to be uniform.
5) Inference to the best explanation takes us from examined to unexamined instances of a given kind. We try to decide which of a group of competing hypotheses provides the best explanation of our data,in which we appeal to knowledge gained through ordinary induction.
6) Subjective probability is a measure of the strength of our personal opinions, no objective facts about probability, just based on what we believe. Logical probability is objectively true or false. It is a measure of the strength of evidence in its favour. It is important to know because we find laws and theories formulated by these probabilities.
1. Why should we trust scientist? They have reason and evidence for their claims.
ReplyDelete2. - Deductive- if premises are true, then the conclusion must be true
- Ex. French man and the wine
- All French men like wine, here is a French man...he must like wine.
1. P v F 2. P = F
- PAGE 19!!
- Inductive- moves from premises about objects we have examined to conclusions about objects we haven't examined, in which the conclusion can be false.
- Ex. Eggs - five eggs are rotten so they assume that the sixth egg is rotten, too.
4. - Hume's problem of induction: science assumes the uniformity of nature.
○ Problem because they don't know if this is true.
○ Would have to give a reason for it to be true.
○ Changes
○ "reasoning" is based on induction
○ Hume reasons that the answer lies in probability
6. - Probability (3 explanations)
○ Subjective: implies that there are no objective facts about probability, independently of what people believe.
○ Logical: A statements probability is the measure of the strength of evidence in its favor, on this view.
○ Frequency: flipping a coin (what ever happens most-the frequency) 50/50
6.)Probability is described as a measure of the strength of our personal opinions (p.36) and a measure of the strength of evidence (p. 35). It is important to know the different interpretations of probability so that we can come to a conclusion on whether or not the concept sheds light on Hume's problem of inductive reasoning.
ReplyDelete5.) Inference to the best explanation is a type of reasoning that explains a hypothesis in the best way by accounting for all of the available data (cheese and mouse example).
1.) Scientists always question what scientists say. The fact of the matter is, a lot of people like to talk about subjects they actually no little to nothing about. Science is probably the most popular one of these subjects. Science is the most valuable way of obtaining knowledge because it is simple. It uses our five senses and pattern seeking to develop a model of reality so we can learn from it, and develop around it. Anyone can and should question what anyone says. Just remember that someone who has spent their entire life on a subject probably knows more about then you do. You can seek knowledge and try to understand that person, but do not assume you know better.
ReplyDelete2.) Deductive reasoning is a logical process in which a conclusion is based on the concordance of multiple premises that are generally assumed to be true.
Example: Aristotle wrote: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
This example is just like the one from the text: "All french men like wine"
Inductive reasoning is the process of reasoning in which the premises of an argument are believed to support the conclusion but do not support it.
Example: The ice is cold.... To infer general propositions such as: All ice is cold.
1.) Why Should we trust scientists: I believe we should trust scientist because nothing that they do is not something they have not experimented with. if a scientists has really taken the time to research something that they are passionate about they will provide proof. I am the type of person who needs some type of proof to believe theories and laws of any sort. This is why I believe scientists can be trusted.
ReplyDelete5.) Explain inference to the best interpretation: When reading the text I have come up with a simple definition of Inference. My definition is an assumption based on prior events or experiments. Most of the time an inference is only made after a scientists has conducted one or several different attempts on an experiment over time. After the same results have happened consistently that's when the inference comes into play.
1) why should we trust scientist: scientist in my opinion are just looked at as all knowing it some ways. A lot of people have know idea what makes a person to deserve the title of a scientist, when people devote there whole life into researching a topic or subject people understand how hard that is to do. when someone puts in that amount of time we believe that they have to the right answers. Scientists also have a pretty good track record as a whole on being right.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Patrick, but there have been cases were people take advantage of the system. The saying goes a few bad apples will ruin the batch and some scientists have forced results due to who signs their checks. The beauty of science is that there will be other scientists who try to replicate experiments and they will keep the bad apples in line so people can continue to trust the scientist who devout so much time into their work and report true results. I just wanted to add that to your point.
DeleteWe should trust scientists because they run many tests and experiments to make sure that their results can be replicated before publishing their findings. If a scientist makes a false claim, other scientists will find their mistakes when they are trying to re-create the experiment. Because scientists collaborate in this way, we can trust their results, especially if other scientists have been able to successfully replicate the experiment.
ReplyDeleteDeductive reasoning says that if the premises are true than the conclusion must also be true. The example that is used in the book is the Frenchman and red wine story. This example list the premises as: 'All Frenchmen like red wine' and 'Ben is a Frenchman.' One can conclude that if both of those statements are true, then 'Ben must like red wine.' Inductive reasoning says that the premises give enough information that one could have a logical conclusion but it might not necessarily be true. The example from the book that is given for inductive reasoning is whether the sun will rise in the morning. One can conclude that the sun will rise tomorrow because it has risen everyday but there is no way to prove this conclusion.
Hume says that the problem with induction is that these conclusions can only be made based on experience and there is no way to prove that these experiences won't change in the future.
1) I think it is important for us to trust scientist. The reason i say this is there is so much information that they could possible unlock about the natural world. We are by nature a very curious species and always want to know the unknown. Science is just one way for us to learn about the unknown. Also what other choice do we have? Scientist are people who dedicate years to their research and its something they are very passionate about. They are "experts" and we trust experts to tell us things we cannot understand ourselves. That being said i use this term lightly because there are scenarios that we have seen in the past where these scientist aren't always the most trustworthy of people.
ReplyDelete