1) Does this example require deductive or inductive logic?
2) What are the premises?
3) Are the premises stated or unstated?
4) What is the argument’s conclusion?
5) In your opinion, is this a convincing argument? Why or why not?
Inductive logic involves deciding what is likely to be true given some starting set of beliefs or observations.
2. No stains on hands
4. Did not steal cookies
5. No because the child could have washed his/her hands
The premise, unstated, is that you must have chocolate stains on your hands in order to take chocolate chip cookies.
The conclusion is that if you can’t find the chip, you must acquit.
This argument is not convincing at all for several reasons:
1. It ignores a myriad of varibles, such as hand washing, wearing gloves or using tongs to take the cookies
2. It is not an observation that can be stated categorically, or even with a marginal amount of repeat observations.
The argument is simply not supported by any kind of imperical evidence. With no evidence other than that presented, you could just as easily state that all people that steal chocolate chip cookies wash their hands…
- Academic Writing
- Case Study
- Critical Thinking
- Education Questions
- Essay Tips
- Essay Writing
- Free Essay Samples
- Free Essay Templates
- Free Essay Topics
- Human Resources
- Problem Solving
- Research Paper
- Review Writing
- Social Issues
- Speech Writing
- Term Paper
- Thesis Writing
- Writing Styles