Deduction can be useful if a new legal rule is being tested to discover whether it is going to clash with any existing legal rule. It can also be useful when precedent is being teased out for the first time and logical consequences need to be tracked. Logic distinguishes between deductive and inductive. An inductive argument can for example have as an inference a generalisation (eg, innocent people do not run away). Figure 7.9: generalisations A generalisation can be quite easily attacked as it is usually constructed on flimsy arguments. But it is also worth remembering that no argument can ever be 100% sound. Remember our system requires less than perfect proof: balance of probabilities in the civil area and beyond reasonable doubt in the criminal law. So, accusing someone of not having a perfect 100% argument is not a good argument! No one has a 100% case. 7.8.2 Induction There is another form of arguing which involves arguments that put forward some general proposition (the conclusion) from fact or facts that seem to provide some evidence for the general given proposition or group of propositions (the premises). This is perhaps the closest to the everyday legal argument when decisions are made concerning which side of a dispute is accorded the privileging of their story in terms of the law’s authority to provide an declaration of right followed by sanction and/or compensation. Inductive reasoning is similar to deductive reasoning in so far as the conclusions are based on premises. However, in inductive reasoning, the conclusion reached extends beyond the facts in the premise. The premise supports the conclusion, it makes it probable. Therefore, there is less certainty and it is possible that another conclusion exists. A sub-division of inductive reasoning is reasoning by analogy or analogous reasoning, this being the method best known to English legal method. The difference between deductive and inductive reasoning is that deductive reasoning is a closed system of reasoning, from the general to the general or the particular, and includes cases where the conclusion is drawn out; it is, therefore, analytical, whereas inductive reasoning is an open system of reasoning. It involves finding a

2012 ◽  
pp. 230-230
Keyword(s):  
Deductive Reasoning ◽  
Inductive Reasoning ◽  
Legal Rule ◽  
Reasonable Doubt ◽  
Good Argument ◽  
Inductive Argument ◽  
Legal Method ◽  
General Proposition ◽  
The Difference ◽  
First Time

general rule from particular cases and is inconclusive which suggests the end processes of legal judgments are inconclusive. However, when it is, the courts ensure that inconclusive reasoning can be enforced! Like deductive reasoning, the logic of inductive reasoning has no interest in the actual truth of the propositions that are the premises or the conclusion. Just because a logical form is correctly constructed, it does not mean that the conclusion expressed is true. The truth of a conclusion depends upon whether the major and minor premises express statements that are true. The statements may be false. Much time is spent by lawyers in court attempting to prove the truth of statements used as building blocks in the construction of arguments. In an inductive argument, the premises only tend to support the conclusions, but they do not compel the conclusion. By tradition, the study of inductive logic was kept to arguments by way of analogy, or methods of generalisation, on the basis of a finite number of observations. Argument by analogy is the most common form of argument in law. Such an argument begins by stating that two objects are observed to be similar by a number of attributes. It is concluded that the two objects are similar with respect to a third. The strength of such an argument depends upon the degree of relationship. Lawyers are advisers and they offer predictive advice based on how previous similar cases have been dealt with. All advice is based on the lawyers’ perception of what would happen in court; this is usually enough to ensure that, in the vast majority of civil cases, matters between disputants are settled. The lawyers’ perception is based upon their experience of how judges reason. Although deductive reasoning lends support to the Blackstonian theory that the law is always there to be found, there is room for the judge to exercise discretion. A judge will have to find the major premise. The judge may do this by looking at statutes or precedent. In the absence of statute, precedent or custom, he or she may need to create one by analogy or a process of induction. Once the judge has stated the major premise the judge will need to examine the facts of the case to ascertain if they are governed by the major premise. If this has been established, the conclusion will follow syllogistically. In the vast majority of cases, the conclusion will simply be an application of existing law to the facts. Occasionally, the decision creates a new law which may or may not be stated as a proposition of law. To ascertain whether a new law has been stated may require a comparison between the material facts implied within the major premise and the facts which make up the minor premise. To summarise, judges are involved in a type of inductive reasoning called reasoning by analogy. This is a process of reasoning by comparing examples. The purpose is to reach a conclusion in a novel situation. This process has been described as a three stage process: (1) the similarity between the cases is observed; (2) the rule of law (ratio decidendi) inherent in the first case is stated. Reasoning is from the particular to the general (deduction); (3) that rule is applied to the case for decision. At this point, reasoning is from the general to the particular (induction).

2012 ◽  
pp. 231-231
Keyword(s):  
Deductive Reasoning ◽  
Inductive Reasoning ◽  
Inductive Logic ◽  
Logical Form ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Building Blocks ◽  
Major Premise ◽  
Inductive Argument ◽  
Actual Truth ◽  
First Case

The lawyer, like a scientist, spends time considering the importance of supporting all statements with evidence and considers how one might weigh evidence on a scale of weak to strong. What is it that is actually proved by the evidence? However, the lawyer deals in words, reports, reconstructions; the lawyer was not present observing the wrong, the accident, the incident. The scientist can always replay the event, observe the event. So, there is not a strict correlation between the lawyer and the scientist. The logician, like the lawyer, deals in statements expressed in words and symbols called propositions. In the context of logic, the word ‘proposition’ only means making a statement or an assertion about something. Essentially, logic is the study of propositions and how conclusions may be correctly obtained from propositions in the process of reasoned argument. There are two main types of logic: deductive and inductive. There is also a third process: abduction. Each of these processes will be briefly explained. In addition, ‘analogic argument’ (which is really a form of inductive reasoning) will be discussed, because analogic reasoning is the type of reasoning used within the English legal system where the courts argue from precedent to precedent. In fact analysis is a species of inductive reasoning. Reasoning itself is analogous to a journey: (a) prepare/collect information; (b) order/organise information; (c) start working through the information once the direction of travel is clear. When people set out on a journey, they normally have an idea of where they are going. If they do not know where they are going, this is usually a matter of deliberate choice. When people begin to consider argument construction, they need to know where they are going: To begin with the end in mind.’ Many students, however, do not know where they are going, hope they will know when they get there, and often give up exhausted and arbitrarily state ‘Therefore, this is the end’! It is not possible to craft a good argument by accident. Useful information to include as evidence for an argument may be uncovered accidentally; however, the argument can never be accidentally constructed. 7.8 TYPES OF LEGAL REASONING 7.8.1 Deduction Reasoning can be described as a careful journey through various propositions. Movement being allowed by evidence leading to inference. In deductive reasoning, the argument has to follow a prescribed form.

2012 ◽  
pp. 228-228
Keyword(s):  
Legal System ◽  
Deductive Reasoning ◽  
Inductive Reasoning ◽  
Legal Reasoning ◽  
Good Argument ◽  
Working Through

scholarly journals Developing Critical Thinking with Debate: Evidence from Iranian Male and Female Students

2016 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryam Danaye Tous ◽  
Sara Haghighi
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Deductive Reasoning ◽  
Inductive Reasoning ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
Critical Thinking Skills ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
Five Dimensions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Difference

The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference between the performance of Iranian male and female EFL learners on the five dimensions of the California Critical Thinking Skills Test.88 learners, out of 120, who were selected through convenience sampling method, participated in this study. The researcher used a quantitative research method with one-group pretest posttest design. This group received some treatment in the form of “the Meeting-House Debate” strategy. Data analysis was done using descriptive and inferential statistics. Result showed that there was no significant difference in the performance of males and females on the sub-scales measured; i.e. evaluation, analysis, inference, deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning. It was concluded that gender did not have a significant effect on the students’ critical thinking skills.

Strategies for Oral Delivery of Metal-Saturated Lactoferrin

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (11) ◽  
pp. 1046-1051 ◽  
Author(s):  
Przemysław Gajda-Morszewski ◽  
Klaudyna Śpiewak-Wojtyła ◽  
Maria Oszajca ◽  
Małgorzata Brindell
Keyword(s):  
Biological Activity ◽  
Oral Delivery ◽  
Therapeutic Potential ◽  
Structure And Function ◽  
The Difference ◽  
And Function ◽  
First Time

Lactoferrin was isolated and purified for the first time over 50-years ago. Since then, extensive studies on the structure and function of this protein have been performed and the research is still being continued. In this mini-review we focus on presenting recent scientific efforts towards the elucidation of the role and therapeutic potential of lactoferrin saturated with iron(III) or manganese(III) ions. The difference in biological activity of metal-saturated lactoferrin vs. the unmetalated one is emphasized. The strategies for oral delivery of lactoferrin, are also reviewed, with particular attention to the metalated protein.

Nokhri, Ger, and the Art of Separation in the Hebrew Bible

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adi Ophir ◽  
Ishay Rosen-Zvi
Keyword(s):  
Hebrew Bible ◽  
Biblical Literature ◽  
The Difference ◽  
First Time

This chapter traces the developments of various terms denoting “others” in biblical literature. In much of the biblical corpus, Israel is still one goy among many, and the difference between it and its Others is neither binary nor stable. After a brief analysis of the dynamics of familial and ethnwic separations in Genesis and Exodus, this chapter concentrates on the priestly and Deuteronomistic modes of separating peoples, examines the novelty and limitedness of the Deuteronomistic legislation, where the nokhri (stranger) is systematically contrasted for the first time with the Israelite (referred to as “your brother”), and follows the various modes of separations and their rationales.

It Keeps Me Seeking

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Briggs ◽  
Hans Halvorson ◽  
Andrew Steane
Keyword(s):  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Quantum Physics ◽  
Natural World ◽  
Theological Reflection ◽  
Fine Tuning ◽  
Good Argument ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Argument From Design ◽  
Relationship Of

Two scientists and a philosopher aim to show how science both enriches and is enriched by Christian faith. The text is written around four themes: 1. God is a being to be known, not a hypothesis to be tested; 2. We set a high bar on what constitutes good argument; 3. Uncertainty is OK; 4. We are allowed to open up the window that the natural world offers us. This is not a work of apologetics. Rather, the text takes an overview of various themes and gives reactions and responses, intended to place science correctly as a valued component of the life of faith. The difference between philosophical analysis and theological reflection is expounded. Questions of human identity are addressed from philosophy, computer science, quantum physics, evolutionary biology and theological reflection. Contemporary physics reveals the subtle and open nature of physical existence, and offers lessons in how to learn and how to live with incomplete knowledge. The nature and role of miracles is considered. The ‘argument from design’ is critiqued, especially arguments from fine-tuning. Logical derivation from impersonal facts is not an appropriate route to a relationship of mutual trust. Mainstream evolutionary biology is assessed to be a valuable component of our understanding, but no exploratory process can itself fully account for the nature of what is discovered. To engage deeply in science is to seek truth and to seek a better future; it is also an activity of appreciation, as one may appreciate a work of art.

Species diversity and abundance of Dacus (Diptera: Tephritidae) in five ecosystems of Penang, West Malaysia

1982 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 709-716 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tan Keng-Hong ◽  
Lee Soo-Lam
Keyword(s):  
Species Diversity ◽  
Capsicum Annuum ◽  
Fruits And Vegetables ◽  
Methyl Eugenol ◽  
Dacus Dorsalis ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Vegetable Farm ◽  
First Time

AbstractDacus dorsalis Hend. infested eleven, D. cucurbitae Coq. five and D. umbrosus F. two of the eighteen common fruits and vegetables grown in Penang, West Malaysia. D. tau (Wlk.) infested bacang (Mangifera foetida), D. caudatus F. chilli (Capsicum annuum) and D. frauenfeldi Schin. water guava (Eugenia javanica), together with D. dorsalis. Pomelo (Citrus grandis) was found infested for the first time by D. cucurbitae. No flies were trapped using Capilure and trimedlure as baits. Cue-lure attracted D. caudatus, D. cucurbitae, D. frauenfeldi, D. occipitalis (Bez.) and D. tau. Methyl eugenol attracted D. dorsalis and D. umbrosus. Dorsalure was less attractive to D. caudatus and D. dorsalis than cue-lure and methyl eugenol, respectively, but it was equally attractive to D. frauenfeldi as cue-lure. Using traps baited with cue-lure or methyl eugenol in five ecosystems, the highest numbers of males of D. dorsalis, D. umbrosus, D. frauenfeldi and D. caudatus trapped were from a village, on a vegetable farm for D. cucurbitae, and D. occipitalis was only caught in a forest. Analysis showed that for each species of Dacus the difference between ecosystems was highly significant. The few examples caught in grassland were probably migrants.

Dose-window dependence on Si crystal orientation in separation by implanted oxygen substrate formation

2004 ◽  
Vol 19 (12) ◽  
pp. 3607-3613 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Iikawa ◽  
M. Nakao ◽  
K. Izumi
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Data ◽  
Numerical Analysis ◽  
Crystal Orientation ◽  
Oxygen Ion ◽  
The Difference ◽  
First Time ◽  
Good Agreement

Separation by implemented oxygen (SIMOX)(111) substrates have been formed by oxygen-ion (16O+) implantation into Si(111), showing that a so-called “dose-window” at 16O+-implantation into Si differs from Si(100) to Si(111). In SIMOX(100), an oxygen dose of 4 × 1017/cm2 into Si(100) is widely recognized as the dose-window when the acceleration energy is 180 keV. For the first time, our work shows that an oxygen dose of 5 × 1017/cm2 into Si(111) is the dose-window for the formation of SIMOX(111) substrates when the acceleration energy is 180 keV. The difference between dose-windows is caused by anisotropy of the crystal orientation during growth of the faceted buried SiO2. We also numerically analyzed the data at different oxidation velocities for each facet of the polyhedral SiO2 islands. Numerical analysis results show good agreement with the experimental data.

45° REFLECTOMETRY OF SEMICONDUCTOR QUANTUM WELLS

2001 ◽  
Vol 15 (17n19) ◽  
pp. 683-687
Author(s):  
A. SILVA-CASTILLO ◽  
F. PEREZ-RODRIGUEZ
Keyword(s):  
Quantum Well ◽  
Quantum Wells ◽  
Growth Direction ◽  
Angle Of Incidence ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
New Information ◽  
Difference Formula ◽  
Exciton Polaritons ◽  
The Difference ◽  
First Time

We have applied the 45° reflectometry for the first time to study exciton-polaritons in quantum wells. The 45° reflectometry is a new polarization-modulation technique, which is based on the measurement of the difference [Formula: see text] between the p-polarization reflectivity (Rp) and the squared s-polarization reflectivity [Formula: see text] at an angle of incidence of 45°. We show that [Formula: see text] spectra may provide qualitatively new information on the exciton-polariton modes in a quantum well. These optical spectra turn out to be very sensitive to the zeros of the dielectric function along the quantum-well growth direction and, therefore, allow to identify the resonances associated with the Z exciton-polariton mode. We demonstrate that 45° reflectometry could be a powerful tool for studying Z exciton-polariton modes in near-surface quantum wells, which are difficult to observe in simple spectra of reflectivity Rp

scholarly journals A Clinical Study of Toxication Caused by Carbamazepine Abuse in Adolescents

2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Xu ◽  
Yu-Lin Chen ◽  
Ying Zhao ◽  
Li-Jie Wang ◽  
Jiu-Jun Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
School Performance ◽  
Young Patients ◽  
Median Dose ◽  
Toxic Dose ◽  
Adolescent Population ◽  
Urban Rural ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Abuse Treatment ◽  
First Time ◽  
At Risk Adolescents

Carbamazepine is known to produce the side effect of euphoria. As such, it lends itself to being a drug of abuse, particularly in the adolescent population. This retrospective study evaluated carbamazepine abuse, treatment course, and associated morbidity in Chinese adolescents. The median dose of carbamazepine resulting in overdose was 2,000 mg (800–5,000). Patients were largely from urban-rural fringe areas (76.47%, 52.94%) with school performance within the last 1/3 range and (52.94%) unsupervised by parents. 35.29% experienced an obvious sense of euphoria. All patients had nervous system symptoms, 6 (35.29%) cases developed coma (GCS < 8), and 5 (29.41%) cases experienced convulsion. Four cases were treated with hemodialysis. The incidence rate in young patients with repeat carbamazepine use and without the supervision of parents was higher than that in first-time users (5/7 versus 4/10), but the difference was not significant. The toxic dose of repeat users was 3428 ± 1035 mg, significantly higher than that of 1470 ± 646 mg in first-time users (P=0.001). Carbamazepine can produce a sense of euphoria, which is more likely to lead to its abuse and overdose in adolescents. To prevent carbamazepine abuse and overdose will be critical in educating at-risk adolescents and preventing associated morbidities in the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document