How are the method of deduction and the induction method are organically inherent in human thinking?

What do you think?

Leave a Reply

GIPHY App Key not set. Please check settings

5 Comments

  1. Inquisitiveness and life suggests that a person recognizes the structure of different entities with which he faces, so an analysis appears that logically ends with induction, i.e. the formation of general conclusions based on the analysis of many private. Thus, a person learns to classify and distinguish between different classes of entities by their generic characteristics. The answer in the nature of some tools and materials makes a person invent something new, because A person has no other options to survive in this aggressive world, so a synthesis appears that leads to specific results of activity. Thus, a person identifies common features in different entities, those which most affect the result. And then, as you know, being determines consciousness, i.e. A person thinks as it acts, in other way thinking does not work. It’s just that a person repeatedly scrolls some actions in consciousness and checks what result it can turn out, then tries to repeat it with his hands, i.e. on experience and confirm the result of mental activity. Thus, a person simply cannot think differently as from private to general and from general to the particular. In addition, thinking in general and such a way of thinking will be spent on any creature in any corner of the Universe, because . He appears in the process of social activity and reflects it. And philosophers simply use the method of reflection to describe these processes, i.e. They do not invent some special way of thinking, but only analyze the process of thinking itself, i.e. They study it as it is, and do not come up with some artificial thinking procedures. The procedure for thinking looks no more than any other human activity procedures. Just a person has mastered special training procedures and therefore they seem external to the actual activity of a person. In fact, thinking comes from the activity itself and cannot come from much more.

  2. Induction is a transition from private observations to general conclusions. Deduction – the path in the opposite direction – from general statements to private. Induction and deduction are inherent (organically, integrally) to the thinking of any modern person. But – to different people to varying degrees. To whom deductive conclusions are closer (Sherlock Holmes and many men in general), and to whom – induction (many women and all children). And to whom – both to a noticeable extent (they can be women and men). But for some, both are not very necessary, they are accustomed to think more often and live as others will be told. And deduction and induction are the results of the development of human thinking. I think that a person has mastered induction in ancient times earlier than deduction. Moreover, this development often came across failures. For example, an ancient man reasoned like this: I got a lot of food yesterday, today I got a lot of food – I meant, I was a great hunter and every day I can get food. What such induction led, it is easy to understand))). But gradually the ability to derive general statements from many private in humans was improved. But deduction is probably a later acquisition of human thinking.

  3. Induction is a transition from private observations to general conclusions. Deduction – the path in the opposite direction – from general statements to private. Induction and deduction are inherent (organically, integrally) to the thinking of any modern person. But – to different people to varying degrees. To whom deductive conclusions are closer (Sherlock Holmes and many men in general), and to whom – induction (many women and all children). And to whom – both to a noticeable extent (they can be women and men). But for some, both are not very necessary, they are accustomed to think more often and live as others will be told. And deduction and induction are the results of the development of human thinking. I think that a person has mastered induction in ancient times earlier than deduction. Moreover, this development often came across failures. For example, an ancient man reasoned like this: I got a lot of food yesterday, today I got a lot of food – I meant, I was a great hunter and every day I can get food. What such induction led, it is easy to understand))). But gradually the ability to derive general statements from many private in humans was improved. But deduction is probably a later acquisition of human thinking.

  4. Very inherent. So much so that we use deduction every day at least dozens of times. Induction is also quite often and automatically. But there is one point. This is not done analytically. That is, not divided. We do not divide the parcels, concepts. Specialization and generalization (basics of deduction and induction) are already laid down in an associative network and are performed instantly and holistically. There are essentially not deduction and induction in the classical logical understanding. So they can be done analytically, and integral, and something average, and There is no clear border. And one more feature: in order to perform deduction, you must first make a generalization, no matter how strange it sounds. For example, a person saw an approaching dog. First, he needs to attribute this specific object to the class of “dog” (generalization). And only then to remember how to handle dogs, this will be the 1st package according to the rules of syllogistics, but the 2nd in the sequence of reasoning in this case is that deduction is based on concretization, it is said very conditionally and this does not correspond to reality . Since the classic numbering of the packages does not imply a sequence (that is, the 1st – not because it is formulated 1 first, but it is simply assigned this number) and another moment. All of the above referred to the first figure of syllogisms and affirmative judgments. But there are other combinations of figures and statements, especially negative ones, which are clearly unnatural for humans. In them, people make gross mistakes and do not notice them, and sometimes they cannot understand whether the reasoning is correct. All these syllogisms are called deductive conclusions. Whether they are deduction, or is it only 1 figure, no one clearly answers. Apparently, the logic could not agree on terminology. Induction is also absolutely natural and intuitive. But as a rule, intuitive induction is incomplete and leads to false conclusions.

  5. Both the method of deduction and the induction method are important and widely used methods of reasoning in human thinking. Deduction is a method of reasoning, which includes the beginning with a general statement or set of statements (prerequisites) and their use to achieve a certain conclusion. Induction is a method of reasoning, which includes the beginning with specific observations or examples and their use to achieve general conclusion. Deduction is often associated with logical and mathematical thinking, while induction is more closely related to scientific and empirical thinking. Both methods can be useful and effective in various situations and contexts. It is generally believed that people have a natural tendency to both deductive and inductive reasoning, and that the use of these methods is a fundamental part of how we process and comprehend the information. However, the degree of use of each method can vary depending on a person and a specific situation.

What will freelancer make happier (and more efficiently) in his “freelance” working life?

Why don’t they value and understand that elderly people are a treasure and they connect us with the past?