Cognitive PsychologyL: CONCEPT AND TYPES OF REASONING

CONCEPT AND TYPES OF REASONING 

Abstract:

 A deductive argument’s premises provide conclusive evidence for the truth of its conclusion. An inductive argument’s premises provide probable evidence for the truth of its conclusion.

 

REASONING:

     In psychology reasoning refers to the cognitive process through which individuals engag in logical thinking draw conclusions, make judgements, and solve problems, based on available information, evidence,and prior knowledge. Reasoning involves the ability to analyze, evaluate, and integrate information in order to arrive at a logical and coherent understanding or solution.

 

CONCEPT OF REASONING:

     Piaget’s was the first person who gave the concept of reasoning. His theory of cognitive development was the first complete theory of reasoning development. The concept of reasoning refers to the cognitive process of using logical and thinking to make sense of information, draw conclusions, solve problems, and make judgements. It involves the ability to analyze, evaluate, and integrate , different pieces of information or evidence in order to reach logical and informed conclusions or decisions.

 

REASONING METHODS AND ARGUMENTATION:

     Reasoning methods and argumentation refer to the various approaches used to support claims, make arguments, and justify beliefs. They provide framework for organizing and presenting logical and persuasive reasoning. Here are some common reasoning methods and argumentation strategies.

 

DEDUCTIVE REASONING:

      Deductive reasoning is a logical process in which specific conclusions are drawn form general principal or premises. It follows a top- down approach, moving from general statements to more specific conclusions. Here’s an example of deductive reasoning:

PREMISE 1: All mammals are warm-blooded.

PREMISE 2:A dog is a mammal.

CONCLUSION: Therefore, a dog is warm-blooded.

In this example, the first premise states a general principal that all mammals are warm-blooded. The second premise establishes that a dog is a mammal. By applying the general principal ( premise 1) to the specific case ( premise 2), we can logically conclude that a dog must be warm-blooded ( conclusion).

There are three types of deductive reasoning:

·        Syllogism

·        Modus ponens

·        Modus tollens

SYLLOGISM:

     “All dogs can fly. Fido is a dog. Fido can fly.” That is a perfectly valid argument in terms of logic, but this flawless logic is based on an untrue premise. If a person accepts the major and minor premises of an argument, the conclusion follows undeniably by the sheer force of reason.

MODUS PONENS:

     Modus ponens is a deductive reasoning pattern that affirms the antecedent of a conditional statement to draw a conclusion.

EXAMPLE: Premise 1: If it is raining, then the ground is wet. Premise 2: It is raining. Conclusion: Therefore, the ground is wet.

MODUS TOLLENS:

     Modus tollens is a deductive reasoning pattern that denies the consequent of a conditional statement to draw a conclusion.

EXAMPLE:

Premise 1:If the alarm goes off, then there is a fire. Premise 2: There is no fire. Conclusion: Therefore, the alarm will not go off.

INDUCTIVE REASONING:

     Inductive reasoning is a logical process in which general conclusions or generalization are made based on specific observations or evidence. It involves moving from particular instances to broader generalizations Unlike deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion but rather establishes it as probable or likely

EXAMPLE:

Here’s an example of inductive reasoning:

OBSERVATION 1: Every crow I have seen is back.

OBSERVATION 2: Every crow my friend has seen is black.

OBSERVATION 3: Every crow my neighbor has seen is black.

CONCLUSION: Based on these observations. I conclude that all crows are black.

There are five types of inductive reasoning:

INDUCTIVE GENERALIZATION:

     This type of inductive reasoning involves drawing a general conclusion based on the limited number of specific instances or examples. It assumes that what is true for the observed cases will be true for the entire population or category.

EXAMPLE:

     After observing several dogs and noting that they bark, one may generalize that all dogs bark.

STATISTICAL GENERALIZATION:

     In this type of inductive reasoning conclusions are drawn based on statistical data and probabilities. It involves inferring characteristics or pattern based on the frequency or likelihood of occurrence.

EXAMPLE:

     A survey finds that 80% of respondents prefer coffee over tea, so one may generalize that a majority of the population pefers coffee.

ANALOGICAL REASONING:

     Analogical reasoning involves drawing conclusions by comparing similarities between different situations or cases. It assumes that if tow things are alike in certain aspects, they may be alike in other aspects as well.

EXAMPLE:

     If a new drug is effective in treating a similar disease in mice, analogical reasoning suggests that it may be effective in humans as well

CAUSAL REASONING:

     Causal reasoning involves inferring cause-and-effect relationship based on observed correlations or patterns. It assumes that certain events or factors are responsible for producing specific outcomes.

EXAMPLE:

     Observing that people who exercise regularly have better cardiovascular health,one may infer that regular exercise cause improved cardiovascular health.

SIGN REASONING :

     This is simple reasoning in the form of an argument based on signs. These arguments occur without the use of the word “sign,” though

EXAMPLE:

     There’s a railroad crossing sign ahead on the highway, so there’s a railroad crossing ahead.

 

Conclusion:

Ianductive reasoning: conclusion merely likely

Inductive reasoning begins with observations that are specific and limited in scope, and proceeds to a generalized conclusion that is likely, but not certain, in light of accumulated evidence. You could say that inductive reasoning moves from the specific to the general