Does inductive reasoning lead to knowledge?
in [Logic]
|
From: jmfbahciv on 3 Jan 2010 09:29 Patricia Aldoraz wrote: > On Jan 3, 12:51 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > >> Well, now I'm considering that I don't know when I'm using >> inductive reasoning when I'm thinking about a problem. > > Neither does Stafford. He just waves his hand to websites and to > Scientific Method. You are so gullible! did you go to that site and do the test? I did. /BAH
From: jmfbahciv on 3 Jan 2010 09:48 John Stafford wrote: <snip --piggy-backing another post> I got to the library and looked up that induction-reasoning web site. I had planned to watch myself think while doing the test. Didn't happen. I popped out the answer to each without thinking. If you call the process for finding those solutions inductive reasoning, then I have to conclude that inductive reasoning is in the hardware. I would not use the word reasoning at all for that kind of brain processing. /BAH
From: M Purcell on 3 Jan 2010 09:51 On Jan 3, 6:48 am, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > John Stafford wrote: > > <snip --piggy-backing another post> > > I got to the library and looked up that induction-reasoning > web site. I had planned to watch myself think while doing > the test. Didn't happen. I popped out the answer to each > without thinking. You believe thinking is a physical activity unnecessary for answering questions? > If you call the process for finding those solutions > inductive reasoning, then I have to conclude that > inductive reasoning is in the hardware. I would > not use the word reasoning at all for that kind > of brain processing. The generalization of this test to all inductive reasoning is inductive reasoning. Apparently you are still not thinking.
From: Zinnic on 3 Jan 2010 10:48 On Jan 2, 6:27 pm, Patricia Aldoraz <patricia.aldo...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 3, 12:33 am, Zinnic <zeenr...(a)gate.net> wrote: > > > On Jan 2, 12:17 am, Patricia Aldoraz <patricia.aldo...(a)gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > At least Zinnic was starting to ask a few pertinent questions. You are > > > such a sad lot. > > > Hey! No fair teach. Please please take that back and tell me that I, > > ZINNIC, am still at the bottom of your class. > > You have not done enough bad things lately. You are trying to gain an > unfair advantage over that prick Stafford and Dutch! You fail. They > are beating you to the bottom. So I went out and did enough bad to successfully bottom me out. Thanx.!
From: John Stafford on 3 Jan 2010 11:28
In article <hhq9v3027u2(a)news3.newsguy.com>, jmfbahciv <jmfbahciv(a)aol> wrote: > John Stafford wrote: > > <snip --piggy-backing another post> > > I got to the library and looked up that induction-reasoning > web site. I had planned to watch myself think while doing > the test. Didn't happen. I popped out the answer to each > without thinking. > > If you call the process for finding those solutions > inductive reasoning, then I have to conclude that > inductive reasoning is in the hardware. I would > not use the word reasoning at all for that kind > of brain processing. Of course, that is only one example of inductive reasoning, but it is wise to realize that we construct our reality from senses. In the case of that particular example, the premise is what makes it induction - that the last frame will follow the others in pattern when we cannot know that will be the case. It's the induction rule there. I've a lot of examples of how we construct our reality through induction. Perhaps in some other place without *Aldoraz I'll post some examples. *Aldoraz AKA FaSoLa |