Logic/ Reasoning Notes
Logic/ Reasoning Notes PSYCH 85
Popular in Introduction to Cognitive Science
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Psychlogy
This 0 page Class Notes was uploaded by Morgan Hawes on Sunday November 1, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PSYCH 85 at University of California - Los Angeles taught by Kellman in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 9 views. For similar materials see Introduction to Cognitive Science in Psychlogy at University of California - Los Angeles.
Reviews for Logic/ Reasoning Notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 11/01/15
Reasoingchoice and chance the philosophy of induction Skyrms 91 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Thinking is deriving new information from old information Agruement list of statements with a list of premsies leading to a conclusion This is to set up how do we evaluate arguments Everyone is trying to gure out what thinking is when the philosopher thinks about thinking they try to evaluate if reasoning works Normative what people should do When evulating an argument must check for truth value and see if prem lead to con Form and content Valididty if it is impossible to have a true conclusion with false premises Deductive arguments have nessecisty lf prem are true the conc must be false Deductive cannot tell us anything about the world But just because it is not new information does not mean that Is Phsyics is based on observations of the worlds so it cannt be deductive As sciences mature they become more deductive from inductieve enstien Science has observationsdata We get data from experiment or perception We get a generalization from induction and from generalizations we have theories which have unobservable entites Abduction or invention means inference to the best explaination pierece From theories to predictions we have deduction Two types of physicists experimental or theoretical Inductive reasoning does not garuntee the truth of the conclusions Hume examination of induction two main ways a Probability it has worked in the past i Problem the past does not re ect the future Even still how do we know which ones will be right b Problem we are using induction to prove induction c Counter induction it assumes the future will not be like the past But you still use induction to prove counter induction New rittle of induction we are programed to make some inductions and not others Even if you could justify induction which inductions would you make Probability is deductive it is a math system Just because the system is deductive does not Probability it keeps people from contradicting themselves People do not reason very well with probabilistic info we might not have certaintiy but we can make predicitions on probability theory a Ex Separate outcome must equal 10 i Only one team can win superbowl ii Axiums of probability cannot be violated For example book makes think that 40 of book will be in the top 10 of sales This is keeps us from contradicting ourselves
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'