#inductive reasoning

[tremendously-crazy]

⚠️ALERT: SHERLOCK HOLMES DOESN'T ONLY DEDUCE!!!⚠️

Despite the fact that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle refers to his methods as "observation and deduction," Sherlock Holmes actually used a variety of deduction, induction, and abduction!

Merriam Webster uses a very clever soup analogy to explain these three!

"Deductive reasoning, or deduction, is making an inference based on widely accepted facts or premises. If a beverage is defined as "drinkable through a straw," one could use deduction to determine soup to be a beverage. Inductive reasoning, or induction, is making an inference based on an observation, and often an observation of a sample. You can induce that the soup is tasty if you observe all of your friends happily consuming it. Abductive reasoning, or abduction, is making a probable conclusion from what you know. If you see an abandoned bowl of hot soup on the table, you can use abduction to conclude the owner of the soup is likely returning soon."

Throughout the Canon, Holmes uses a mix of all of these methods. It's probably because these terms weren't as well known in the Victorian era. It is a common misconception to refer to any sort of inference as a deduction, but there are actually other types of inferences.

So yes, Sherlock Holmes does use deductive reasoning, but not all of his "deductions" are really that!

[medsocionwheels]

Sociological Theory and the Canon

It's Sociology Sunday! Today we're talking theory.

What is sociological theory?

Sociological theory is a set of interrelated ideas that allow for the (1) systematization of knowledge of the social world (2) the explanation of that world, and (3) predictions about the future of that world, and which are falsifiable through empirical research.

Theory provides a possible answer to questions like, “why did this happen?” or, “why did they do that?” This means theory is speculation, not fact, but unlike “ideas” generally, theory is speculation driven by a more formal, systematic, process, which incorporates the work of previous theorists and research findings.

The Sociological Canon

Some theories are more popular than others. Some theories, while unpopular, are considered “pivotal” to the foundation of sociology. The “sociological canon” helps us identify the “popular” and “pivotal” theories.

The sociological canon is defined as the theories, ideas, and texts that are widely considered as the most important in the field of sociology (Ritzer and Stepnisky 2018) 

“I’m not a regular mom theory, I’m a cool mom theory!”

The canonized theories are sort of like the “cool mom” in Mean Girls (oshowing my age here, the original 😘) – others exist, but these are the ones we tend to think of first when we think of “the mom in Mean Girls” (or, in this case, “sociological theory”).

Critics of the canon argue that the canon is not a neutral construction; rather, it is affected by power and the politics of the theory. To some degree, they are right.

The field of sociology has historically privileged theories that have testable hypotheses, known as “positivist” theories, and theories produced by white men faculty. In this, we can see that the canon, and relatedly, the field of sociology,  have tended to reflect power structures in society more broadly. Which means that, yes, technically the canon is full of theories created by old white dude philosophers in Europe in the late 1800s to early 1900s. Nowadays, though, most sociologists agree that the canon includes much more than Marx, Weber, and Durkheim. 

Meaning the canon is now considered to  include theories from other classical theorists writing during the same time as Mark/Weber/Durkheim, like W.E.B. DuBois and Ida B. Wells. The canon has also expanded in the last 40 or so years to include contemporary theories, such as emancipatory, feminist, and queer theories. These expansions were important steps towards accounting for the reality of the field as it presently exists, and to correctly reflect the field’s foundations which expand far beyond whiteness, masculinity, and western imperial culture. Presently, women make up the (quantitative) majority of sociology faculty, and while this women majority was historically white, the number of women, including and especially women of color, in sociology continues to grow, substantially outpacing white men. 

Sociological Theory and Empirical Research

Empirical research is rooted in theory.

Sometimes these theories are the driving force behind research, constituting the research question for an empirical study. You begin with the possible answer to the question, the theory, and you investigate to see if it holds up–your results may call into question some or all of the theory’s propositions. This is called “deductive reasoning.”

Theory is not always the starting point of research, though. Sometimes theory is generated from research. This process is called “inductive reasoning.” In this case, you begin with observations, draw conclusions, and from those conclusions, generate new ideas about the social world. 

Deductive reasoning is often linked with quantitative research. Quantitative researchers usually have some idea of theory before forming their research question, and some quantitative research is constructed with the goal of testing (falsifying) theoretical propositions.  Qualitative research, in contrast, often uses inductive reasoning, beginning with observation and developing theory as part of the study’s conclusions. This is not always the case with qualitative research, though. One approach to creating contemporary sociological theory assumes the “best” theory is constructed via inductive reasoning, and thus, begins with observation, absent of pre-existing ideas. This is known as a “grounded theory” approach, because it produces theory that is “grounded” in observation of tangible facts instead of based upon pre-existing abstract ideas. The sociologists Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss are often credited with popularizing the “grounded theory” approach, which they outlined in their 1967 book “The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research”.

Other approaches to qualitative research, like content analysis, may start with theory or observations.

Summary:

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Dr. Heather Sue M. Rosen (@medsocionwheels)

Watch full lecture:

[sunnysam-my]

This, my dears, is what we call in philosophy inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning.

the default way for things to taste is good. we know this because "tasty" means something tastes good. conversely, from the words "smelly" and "noisy" we can conclude that the default way for things to smell and sound is bad. interestingly there are no corresponding adjectives for the senses of sight and touch. the inescapable conclusion is that the most ordinary object possible is invisible and intangible, produces a hideous cacophony, smells terrible, but tastes delicious. and yet this description matches no object or phenomenon known to science or human experience. so what the fuck

[easynotes4u]

Deductive and Inductive Reasoning - Syllogism, Analogical, Statistical & Casual Reasoning

In this article we will discuss about various types of deductive and Inductive reasoning such as Syllogism, Analogical, Statistical & Casual Reasoning. DEDUCTIVE REASONING Deductive reasoning is a simple form of arriving at a conclusion by joining two or more pieces of information. It is a process of logical reasoning which processes two or more premises to arrive at a logical conclusion.…

[asprngdeductionist]

The 3 types of reasoning

The 3 types of reasoning we use daily are abductive, inductive and you guessed it, Deductive reasoning. The latter I know the most about. We'll go from least, to most likely getting a conclusion.

Abductive reasoning

Abductive reasoning is the easiest type of reasoning to master. Ab generally means something not according to rules being abnormal. basically, abductive reasoning is trying your best to get a conclusion. Gathering information, and then just getting a conclusion. That easy. You're defienetely not guaranteed to get a conclusion.

Inductive reasoning

Inductive reasoning is following some more rules then abductive reasoning. It's basically everyday doing. I used this to gather information and basically know things for a long time. You learn lenguages with this type of reasoning. It's observing and notiring patters and such. One of my teachers actually said that I'm good in this form of reasoning. This is basically how I study. Also it's basically just a syllogism. it can be false.

Deductive reasoning

Do I really have to explain? Allringt. Deduction is the only type of reasoning that guarantees a conclusion. It takes two premises and makes a conclusion. Basically:

If x = 4 And if y = 1 Then 2x + y = 9

Algebra pretty much sums it up.

This is a tublr exclusive post, so enjoy. Until then...

Happy deducing!

[suliqyre]

Why does induction work? It works because the world seems to have a certain regularity over time: a rock will fall to the ground in the very same way today, tomorrow, and every other day. What guarantees this regularity? Nothing at all... Regularity is a contingent fact about the world, which means the world could always be otherwise. If regularity is contingent then inductive reasoning is also contingent. And if induction is the foundation of all knowledge, then it follows that everything we know is contingent.

Read more...

[philosophybits]

Animals are not guided in [causal] inferences by reasoning: Neither are children: Neither are the generality of mankind, in their ordinary actions and conclusions: Neither are philosophers themselves, who, in all the active parts of life, are, in the main, the same with the vulgar, and are governed by the same maxims.

David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

[politicalprocrastinator]

does kanan ever reflect on how although he may miss the jedi the fact they don't exist anymore means he can live peacefully with his long term partner without being told attachment will lead him to the dark side

[mikafan]

why can beastzai comfortably kill himself permanently where canon dazai doesn’t?

beastzai just makes me sad but i like the implications it leaves about canonverse dazai tho those implications can also just be drawn out from canon itself

- (canon) dazai knows how to kill himself in a meaningful way but avoids doing so; if he’s had previous, sincere attempts, theyve consistently been foiled

- tho dazai might seem like a grey character he sees the world through binary opposites/black and white, which is applicable to beast in the sense that dazai’s search for a purpose in life has two possible outcomes: fulfillment and lack of fulfillment. in his own eyes, dazai’s life is useless or useful - if useful, and his purpose is carried out and seen through, then dazai’s life has no meaning anymore, leaving him to die in peace. dazai is successful killing himself in beast when he isnt in canon verse because he has fulfilled his purpose and believes he extricated himself thoroughly enough from the lives of ppl he cares about that his death will have no long lasting emotional impact. said reason for living was to save oda and ensure the world was fit for him to survive in

- then, maybe in his earlier years his desire to find a reason to live could be considered a survival tactic, unknown to even himself. without a distinct purpose to fulfill dazai can’t truly feel that he is “done” or “finished”, and oda’s wish for him to live on the side of light has no real end. where dazai would otherwise see desire to live as a scale with two distinct sides (fulfillment/lack of fulfillment) oda’s wish bypasses the scale altogether and has no discernible end, thus dazai cant be fully fulfilled and feel comfortable enough to successfully kill himself.

to 16 year old dazai, young and extreme in the way teenagers are (i dont say that in a mocking way or one that makes light of the teenage experience) he had finally found a goal when he received the onslaught of memories of canon dazai, a goal he was so desperate to see through that it both countered his apathy while exacerbating his self sacrificial mindset and behaviors. dazai sees himself as a vehicle of action rather than a human, which persists in canon verse too. dazai is less the person moving the pawns and more of a pawn moving the other pawns in the “right” direction - he wants to make it so that his removal from the chess board will not impact his side’s victory, that things are done the way they need to be that his broad goal, whatever that may be, is reached with or without him. but that vehicle is all he is (in his mind) - where other people are distinctly human, he will only ever be a pawn, entirely depersonalized, and thats only exacerbated in beast

thing is canon dazai doesn’t really counter this extreme way of viewing things but at the stage he’s at now he can’t simply remove himself from the lives of everybody he knows. people rely on him, they need him, they like him, and he can’t just pull away without consequence. even if his personality is greatly exaggerated and his amenability to expressing vulnerability is still extremely low he does not have the choice of being a mere vehicle of action anymore because of his awareness that people care for him

so, wary as he is of not having that control over his life, of not feeling like he can comfortably die whenever he wants, dazai’s always wanted to feel human and be perceived as human, and he likes having people to protect. even if hes scared that theyll face the consequences of being associated with him dazai will ensure theyre safe which is.. a really broad and almost endless goal to take on !and he is aware its a group effort instead of a scheme that can be seen through by a mastermind. he needs to communicate with the people he cares about (ADA), needs to have faith theyll protect each other just like theyll protect him, even if his instinct fights against it and hes scared to leave things, tasks, etc in hands other than his own

im not saying dazais particularly good at being vulnerable or relying on other people and i think his mindset is still unhealthy and self sacrificial but canon dazai is so embedded in the ADA in a way beastzai wasnt in the PM at age 16. beastzai had the option to “[erase] himself from the narrative” (i love this phrase i stole it from hamilton) but canon dazai quite literally does not. hes in too deep!

[redbean-nom]

watched the first 2 episodes of acolyte and so far i like every character except for the main one lol. (also is her name osha as in occupational safety and health administration??)

[warriorprincesstramp]

love philosophy when it's just shooting the shit about some random crap nobody cares about. when it borders on the scientific? the mathematic? let's all kill ourselves.

[guinevereslancelot]

i bought an oven yesterday 😐

[luckypullerofourlegs]

ze has such cool concepts for death games i wish i cared about the characters and plot more or at all wanted to attempt the gameplay

[journey-to-the-attic]

Random Au idea I had while watching JoJo P5.... you know how the Boss of the mafia is called Diavolo?

Basically Ik is just a normal schoolkid who helps an injured man on her way home. Little does she know the man happens to be Lucifer, one of the leaders who runs the gang controlling the local area, who now owes her his life and will repay his debt as such

In the process he accidentally gets attached and so does the rest of his brothers, oops. Now the gang's all trying to make sure she doesn't get got by their enemies while also trying their best to keep the whole mafia thing a secret (also she's lowkey reforming them without even trying)

oooo this is a cool idea!! (also when i first started playing obey me i spent the first two months thinking of the jojo character EVERY time i saw diavolo, so this au definitely hits home for me)

so i guess diavolo is the... well, diavolo of this situation, the Big Boss of the whole operation, and lucifer is bucciarati, leader of a secondary team within the organisation... maybe the angels could be a rival gang, and the brothers got ousted (and defected to diavolo's side as a result)

it'd be funny if relations are SUPER tense between them on any given day, like one-misstep-from-getting-stabbed levels of bad blood, but as soon as ik shows up there's just a mutual "everyone shut the fuck up and act natural" moment

she shows up while the lucifer's gang is having a stand-off with simeon's and the brothers are all immediately like "SHSHHHSHHHHH. DON'T TELL HER" and simeon just nods and immediately is like "oh what a completely innocent gathering of friends this is! lucifer my friend how nice it is to see you again! i love being normal and hanging out with my friends!!!!"

[philosophybits]

All inferences from experience are effects of custom, not of reasoning.

David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding

[parrotsplayground]

You can't bring everything close to you and observe one by one

Small details become a luxury the further you're observing.

Learn to see the bigger picture.