deductively

share

Examples
deductively's examples

  • Definition of deductively in the Legal Dictionary - by Free online English dictionary and encyclopedia. What is deductively? Meaning of deductively as a legal term. What does deductively mean in law?. — “deductively legal definition of deductively. deductively”, legal-
  • Chris Brady – Targuman: Reading the Bible deductively (Gen 1) There are many things that the author(s) of Genesis does not tell us that we would really like to know What this means for our practice of reading the Bible is that we must maintain. — “Brady on reading the Bible deductively " Confluence: Ben”,
  • Appendix to 4. Deductively Definable Inductive Logics in Preferred Partitions. Here's another illustration that shows converging changes in Back to 4. Deductively Definable Inductive Logics in Preferred Partitions. What Logics of Induction are There?. — “4. Preferred Partitions”, pitt.edu
  • .To deduce is to reason deductively, identifying the unknown by reasoning from the known : From the fact that .a distinction is made between things known inductively, from experience, and those known deductively or theoretically, from a priori principles. — “Search Results for "deductively"”,
  • Deductively definition, based on deduction from accepted premises: See more. — “Deductively | Define Deductively at ”,
  • In order for an argument to be deductively valid, it must have a form or structure that is deductively valid. A form is deductively valid if and only if it preserves truth in all cases, that is, every instance of the form that has true premises also has a true conclusion. — “Philosophy 105”, pc.ctc.edu
  • would say that the Emil argument above is not deductively valid. a deductively valid inference. The doubts that will be expressed below about the validity of modus ponens are. — “Are Some”, dougwalton.ca
  • A theory $T$ is a deductively closed set of sentences in $L$ ; that is, a set $T$ such Some authors do not require that a theory be deductively closed. — “PlanetMath: first-order theory”,
  • A formalist judge makes decisions deductively—that is, by drawing conclusions from premises according to formal rules of Langdell's formalism held that judges make decisions by deductively inferring their rulings from more general principles. — “Philosophy of Law: Lecture Notes: University of West Georgia”, westga.edu
  • Philosophy and Philosophers question: What is the difference between induction and deduction? Generally this is how the concept of Induction and Deduction will move * Induction - particular to general. An argument that is Deductively invalid can be Inductively valid. — “ - What is the difference between induction and”,
  • A "deductively valid" argument has this feature: If the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. with each theorem proven deductively (i.e., with certainty) on the basis of the elements of the foundation or. — “Many Worlds of Logic”,
  • Definition of deductively in the Online Dictionary. Meaning of deductively. Pronunciation of deductively. Translations of deductively. deductively synonyms, deductively antonyms. Information about deductively in the free online English. — “deductively - definition of deductively by the Free Online”,
  • Definition of word from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary with audio pronunciations, thesaurus, Word of the Day, and word games. — “Deductively - Definition and More from the Free Merriam”, merriam-
  • Definition of deductively from Webster's New World College Dictionary. Meaning of deductively. Pronunciation of deductively. Definition of the word deductively. Origin of the word deductively. — “deductively - Definition of deductively at ”,
  • Any inductive argument can also be expressed deductively, and any deductive argument can also be expressed inductively. Even so, it is important to recognize whether the form of an argument is inductive or deductive, because each requires different sorts of support. — “Mission: Critical (Induction vs. Deduction)”, sjsu.edu
  • We found 12 dictionaries with English definitions that include the word deductively: Click on the first link on a line below to go directly to a page where "deductively" is defined. General (11 matching dictionaries) deductively: Compact Oxford English Dictionary [home, info]. — “Definitions of deductively - OneLook Dictionary Search”,
  • Definition of Deductively. Deductively. By deduction; by way of inference; by consequence. Related Definitions: By, Consequence, Deduction, Inference, Of, Way. Deductively Translations. deductively in German is deduktive. — “Definition of Deductively”,
  • It is simply not possible that both (1) and (2) are true and (3) is false, so this argument is deductively valid. All inductive arguments, even good ones, are therefore deductively invalid, and so "fallacious" in the strictest sense. — “Logical Fallacies”,
  • Deductive Reasoning Observance of an event occurring on a repeated basis that leads one to believe that a certain probability is attached to the. — “Deductive reasoning: Definition from ”,
  • How can you tell? Can you use examples?. — “How to tell if an argument is either deductively valid or”,
  • A deductive argument is valid if the conclusion does follow necessarily from the premises, A deductive argument is sound if it is valid and its premises are true. — “Deductive reasoning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia”,

Videos
related videos for deductively

  • Starry Skies Above, Moral Law Within Written and recorded by John Mizzoni From the album, Songs from the 3rd Floor (c) 2006 For more philosophy songs, see With the process of doubt, we can find some things out. Let's clear all the thoughts from our head, we'll replace them with, clear, distinct ones instead. Some of these thoughts, intuitively are known, and some of these thoughts, deductively are shown, by nothing but reason alone. I'm thinking, so I'm existing. God is perfect, so God exists. With your process of doubt, you can't find something out. You think you know who you are, but all our knowing's in doubt. Experience will fall short, passion and custom are king. You're lost in your thought, and to reason you cling, but you're just a bundle, like a rope, or a string. You do not understand the motivational spring. Your mind depends upon your body, You cannot prove that God exists. Instrumental You're moving just a little too fast for me, all I want to do is understand what I see. Some things we know, others we can't. I'm thinking it through and I think I am right, I'm laying out the theory in the books that I write. Pure reason alone can't discover the self. And pure reason cannot prove existence, without concepts experience is blind. Without experience my concepts are all empty. Don't follow your desires, do what reason requires. And pure reason cannot prove existence, without concepts experience is blind. Without experience my concepts are all empty. My solution will pass ...
  • Hiddenness Anyone? TheoreticalBull***'s original video: Veritas48's response: My Argument: Basically: God knows what it would take to make each person believe in him; God is capable of bringing about such circumstances; disbelief only persists because God has not made himself known; all belief is inculpable because God is responsible for the level of "knownness" he has in the world; inculpable disbelief is incompatible with God; Thus, God does not exist. Deductively: D1: Revelation is God's disclosure of himself to his creation D2: Hiddenness describes the apparent lack of evidence for God's existence D3: Evidence is propositional knowledge D4: Revelation is experiential knowledge P1: God desires that mankind have a filial knowledge of Him P2: God can be known propositionally and/or experientially P3: Propositional knowledge does not entail, but may result in, filial knowledge P4: Experiential knowledge does not entail, but may result in, filial knowledge C1: If it is the case that neither propositional knowledge nor experiential knowledge entail filial knowledge but it is also the case that propositional knowledge and experiential knowledge may both result in filial knowledge then neither evidence nor revelation should be of preference in achieving the stated goal of filial knowledge P5: If it is the case that God is omniscient then He is aware of states of affairs that would bring about filial knowledge of Him P6: If it is the case that God is omnipotent ...
  • CIA WhistleBlower EXPOSES Everything Extreme Prejudice A CIA asset (ex, of course), after being jailed for a year &c. shares her testimony as to what actually happened on 9/11. I'm confident that many intelligent people reached the same conclusion, intuitively, as she did, deductively, viz., that 9/11 was both an airline hijacking and a controlled structural failure of the twin towers. This also dovetails with other accounts, such as those of the "Economic Hitman", and "The Shock Doctrine", particularly the latter, where Naomi Klein details not the plans to destroy, but that plans should be in place in the EVENT of catastrophe. Milton Friedman also espouses and recommended this view to those in power.
  • Minesweeper Solver This is a demo of my minesweeper-playing project I wrote over the past couple of days. It emulates a human; reconstructing the board by taking screenshots to detect where each square is and what values are in in each square, and moving the mouse and generating clicks to interact with the board. It does not cheat by reading process memory or anything like that, so it can't solve all games (some can't be deductively solved). Most moves are simple, but it does implement a few more advanced set/subset count-fu techniques to get some of the more obscure moves if the simple moves don't work out. There is no audio.
  • John H. Conway Free Will Lectures [1/6]: Free Will and Determinism in Science and Philosophy John H. Conway's Free Will Lectures: Princeton University 2009 A lecture series on the "free will theorem" by eminent mathematicians John H. Conway and Simon B. Kochen. March 23, 2009: "Free Will and Determinism in Science and Philosophy" Lecture 1 -- INTRODUCTION. -Meet John Conway; hear about Simon Kochen and how the theorem came about. -Free will and determinism in science and philosophy over the last two millennia; the implications of Newtonian and quantum mechanics. -What Conway and Kochen mean by "free will." -Why it can't be proved deductively that free will definitely exists in the first place. -What the theorem does, and doesn't, imply about behavior. -A brief introduction to the three axioms upon which the theorem rests: SPIN, FIN, and TWIN. FIN: There is a maximum speed for propagation of information (not necessarily the speed of light). This assumption rests upon causality. SPIN: The squared spin component of certain elementary particles of spin one, taken in three orthogonal directions, will be a permutation of (1,1,0). TWIN: It is possible to "entangle" two elementary particles, and separate them by a significant distance, so that they have the same squared spin results if measured in parallel directions. This is a consequence of (but more limited than) quantum entanglement. "The free will theorem" "Do we really have free will, or, as a few determined folk maintain, is it all an illusion? We don't know, but will prove in this paper that if indeed ...
  • NIPS 2011 Learning Semantics Workshop: Towards More Human-like Machine Learning of Word Meanings Learning Semantics Workshop at NIPS 2011 Invited Talk: Towards More Human-like Machine Learning of Word Meanings by Josh Tenenbaum Josh Tenenbaum is a Professor in the Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences at Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Him and his colleagues in the Computational Cognitive Science group study one of the most basic and distinctively human aspects of cognition: the ability to learn so much about the world, rapidly and flexibly. Abstract: How can we build machines that learn the meanings of words more like the way that human children do? I will talk about several challenges and how we are beginning to address them using sophisticated probabilistic models. Children can learn words from minimal data, often just one or a few positive examples (one-shot learning). Children learn to learn: they acquire powerful inductive biases for new word meanings in the course of learning their first words. Children can learn words for abstract concepts or types of concepts that have no little or no direct perceptual correlate. Children's language can be highly context-sensitive, with parameters of word meaning that must be computed anew for each context rather than simply stored. Children learn function words: words whose meanings are expressed purely in how they compose with the meanings of other words. Children learn whole systems of words together, in mutually constraining ways, such as color terms, number words, or spatial prepositions. Children learn word ...
  • Learn it, Know it, Own it - Medium 1.m4v A brilliant math project/music video about the Reasoning unit! Lyrics by Joyce, Singing done by Sappho. Christian and Sappho are trying to solve a murder. Instrumentals are Depraved Heart Murder at Sanitarium Square from Repo: The Genetic Opera (not mine.) Lyrics: Reasoning, know it? No, no, no. wait a fraction put some logic in it. Learn it, know it, & own it Learn it, know it, & own it. Believe in theorems, statements, proof is right in front of your eyes. ja triangle grabs your attention, Just like a shout from Mr. G. Before that triangle, there comes a pattern. Conjecture just generalizes it. Challenge it and don't stop till you drop. Prove it wrong with a counterexample, Then when all else fails, Write a statement, prove it by reasoning logically from other true situations, Yeah, a theorem's what it's called. A theorem's what it's called A theorem's what it's called A theorem's what it's called A theorem's what it's called A demonstration is needed, Some statements are tested They are tested for truth Deductive reasoning is what it's called. True or false is up to you, just use that logic. A biconditional statement, but don't forget, If then is conditional, and interchanging hypothesis and the conclusion of a conditional Would be converse I hope you've learned a lot. Here are some more clever things we know: Direct proof A proof that begins with given information and deductively reaches a conclusion Indirect proof A method of proof in which a desired conclusion is ...
  • A theses concerning opinion i enjoy criticism but if you do chose to do so do it well this has been a poorly coordinated attempt to criticize society A theses concerning opinion compliments are sincere embodiments of a personal opinion, that is when they are not hypocritical, a better assessment would be an aggregate of the publics opinion but you can't publicly survey the public so the best course of action would be to develop a strong disregard for opinion and even then it is essential not to allow for the dull receptors of the public to perceive your indifference - thusly one must pretend to give a *** There have been better masters of language, a skill that can oddly be develop with ought any interactions with other human beings, perhaps in more an ameliorated position than that of mine to pursue a statement on human behavior more specifically the opinion humans hold of others but i shall continue for it would be improper for me to stop before i had concluded with the task which the title of this paper has probably already saturated you with; a stereotype of the style and task that is contained in this paper, for if you have read up to this point it has only been augmented so that it becomes pure apprehension. I however must continue for i digress, something which could result in a tragic divergence of the main body of this theses which would result in a paper mostly composed of bombastic language, which the reader might or might not appreciate, coincidently leading no where in the general ...
  • How to Understand Syllogisms This video uses rainbow trout as an example of a what a valid and true syllogism is. Syllogisms help us think deductively and understand the importance of a major premise. If the major premise is false, then all conclusions based on it are also false.
  • Psych-W1_Lecture36 General Psychology Lecture 36
  • Deductively Sound Arguments_HD.mp4 - YouTube.mp4 Video for Open Course Library Logic (PHIL&106), developed by Paul Herrick & Mark Storey
  • Lisa VanDamme - Teaching a Love of Literature Miss VanDamme shares a few stories about the passion students develop for literature at VanDamme Academy. Luc Travers's literature blog can be found at:
  • Logic 101: Introducing Basic Inductive and Deductive Arguments I Introduce the basics on what constitutes "inductive arguments" and deductive arguments" as part 1 of my introduction to logic and argumentation series. Key Points: *A deductive argument is intended to provide absolute and conclusive support for its conclusion. *A deductive argument...
  • TESOL Training inductive v deductive approach.wmv I'm Don Johnson, a TESOL trainer with the University of California - Riverside in Seoul. This clip is from the beginning of my TESOL Grammar course. The content is based on Scott Thornbury's excellent book from 2000 entitled 'How to Teach Grammar' (Chapter 4). Contextualizing the approaches with characters, Deedee and Ian, seems to help my participants better remember the ideas. Please visit my website: for more information.
  • The Speed of Lies - ***ysis of the Impossible Plane Speeds on 9/11 If a "no-planer" is someone who is sure that no aircraft hit the South Tower, then I am NOT a no-planer. If however a no-planer is someone who questions the impossible planes speeds, questions the attachment underneath flight 175, questions reports that 9 of the hijackers were alive after 9/11 (BBC, London Telegraph, London Guardian), questions the ability of the alleged amateur pilots to perform maneuvers that experienced pilots say they could not do, and acknowledges the pilots and other experts who disagree with the official 9/11 story, then most of the 9/11 truth community are already no-planers. Although it is generally accepted by the 9/11 truth community that no plane hit the Pentagon, the moment one takes the anomalies mentioned above to theorize "no planes" in New York, that person has crossed the line, and is called everything from Co-Intel Pro to a disinfo agent. Too bad, because we all agree on a few basic things - we were lied to about 9/11, the wars are unjustified, we're losing our freedoms. Hopefully on these values, the truth community can unite. The freedom we all want includes the freedom to think for ourselves - if someone exercises such freedoms by disagreeing with you, think carefully before you straw man that person into the "disinfo" category. Regarding the fake news footage of the South Tower strike, this DOES NOT automatically mean no planes. Take the faked photos of the moon landing. The faked photos do not deductively prove that the real event ...
  • Is God evil? And is he actually evil or is he probabilistically evil? And does it matter? Alvin Plantinga gives brief explanation of the problem of evil here - Most of the arguments in science rely on inductive arguments, that is, we gather evidence and make an argument for what is probably true. Philosophy traditionally has concerned itself with deductive logic and trying to prove things by use of deduction so that it can be demonstrated that something is demonstrably true and thus a certainty. Life rarely affords us such certainty And expecting that of anyone who we argue with is unrealistic, unfair, And most importantly trivial. It would be irrational to cling to a belief merely because it couldn't be deductively proven to be false, Especially if this was in the face of a good inductive argument.
  • Blooming Students
  • The Fundamental Concepts of Logical Theory - Part 2_HD.mp4 - YouTube.mp4 Video for Open Course Library Logic (PHIL&106), developed by Paul Herrick & Mark Storey
  • Creation Makes Better Science Forms of scientific misconduct [Evolution] include: fabrication -- the publication of deliberately false or misleading research, often subdivided into: Obfuscation -- the omission of critical data or results. Example: Only reporting positive outcomes and not adverse outcomes. Fabrication -- the actual making up of research data and (the intent of) publishing them, sometimes referred to as "drylabbing". Falsification -- manipulation of research data and processes in order to reflect or prevent a certain result. bare assertions -- making entirely unsubstantiated claims. Another form of fabrication is where references are included to give arguments the appearance of widespread acceptance, but are actually fake, and/or do not support the argument. A formal fallacy is an error in logic that can be seen in the argument's form without an understanding of the argument's content. All formal fallacies are specific types of non sequiturs. Appeal to Authority: (argumentum ad verecundiam) Appeals to authority are always deductively fallacious; even a legitimate authority speaking on his area of expertise may affirm a falsehood, so no testimony of any authority is guaranteed to be true. Appeal to probability: assumes that because something could happen, it is inevitable that it will happen. Argument from fallacy: assumes that if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion itself is false. Base rate fallacy: making a probability judgement based on conditional ...
  • whats the difference between deductive and inductive whats the difference between deductive and inductive
  • What Does Justice Mean in Different Historical Times? (c) 2011 Rey Ty 1. Hi, Rey. Let's talk about the history of the concept of justice. Alright? Justice meant something different in the ancient, medieval, modern, & postmodern texts. 2. Confucius talked about the love of humanity, not doing to others what we don't want others to do unto you; doing good to good & justice to evil. Buddha said we should care for all. 3. Socrates said that rulers must care for the welfare of the people. Aristotle said that equals must be treated equally & unequals unequally in proportion to their inequality. 4. In the Medieval times, Aquinas said justice goes from the higher divine to the lower natural & human realms. In the modern times, John Locke said we must not interfere with liberty. 5. For Bentham, we must care for the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. For modern thinkers, feudalism is unjust. Marx said that as workers see capitalism as unjust 6. means that capitalism is historically obsolete. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights indicated that the recognition of the inherent dignity & equal rights of 7. all human beings, women & men, is the foundation of freedom, justice & peace. John Rawls deductively developed an abstract theory according to which justice is fairness. 8. Chomsky used the principles of justice as the starting point to fight against injustice. But Foucault used history as the starting point to look at power & use justice as a weapon 9. to fight against injustice. Using the historical comparative ...
  • [FUNDUB] Genesis Rhapsodos by Christian Sekhanan ok, from now on everytime i get cast as something I'll post a solo fandub with me performing to that character. kind of like a Victory dub, if you will. well, i guess you would've deductively assumed that i got the part for Genesis. and you are correct! i'm not that familiar with the character when i first auditioned for him but upon receiving the role i thought it best to do a little research. i've watched clip after clip of Genesis' scenes in Crisis Core and i think i'm beginning to understand him a whole lot better, which (hopefully) upgrades my performance. About the Genesis voice: I just used the exact same voice i used to audition and copied the pitch of the original, since my Audition was voiced kinda low. I would normally voice Genesis the same way i did in my audition but, while i experimented with this clip, the lower-pitched vocal performance didn't suit the intensity of this scene. I did all the voices in this Video, as well as the editing/Mixing and sound effects. i basically had to recreate the entire audio of this scene, which was really fun. I also got accepted as Reno and Tseng, so expect a video of them soon too (though Tseng is already in this one). Again, this is an [Original Rendition]. so if you want me to sound exactly like the original, then go watch the original scene instead, savvy? [Thank you TheCrimsonDancer for the part(s)] Voice Acting/Editing Christian Sekhanan Scene: "Genesis' Intro" (Crisis Core: FFVII) Music: "Melody of Anger" (Crisis ...
  • 1.4 Proving Conjectures Deductive Reasoning
  • All Bark and No Bite: tooltime9901 You think I just keep repeating my arguments... but I think it looks that way to you because you don't understand that if I present a deductive argument with a conclusion you don't like, you can't just disagree with the conclusion, rationally speaking. You must show how it is deductively invalid. I don't believe you have done this with regards to my "impossible to imagine not existing" argument. Here's one argument for the impossibility for you to imagine you not existing: Any time you imagine something, you are aware of the scene. Being aware is imagining yourself existing. Therefore, anytime you imagine something, you are imagining yourself existing. And then a second one: It is impossible to imagine a scene without imagining your experiences existing. Any collection of your experiences is your consciousness. Therefore, it is impossible to imagine a scene without imagining your consciousness existing. ^^^^^ That one is pwnage. Oh, and let me just mention that if the "option" is "minds being created," an act of creation wouldn't be one of the *assumptions* of that option, but what we must find the assumptions *of*. That *alone* was epic fail on your part. So, when you are including "11 acts of creation," that was hilarious.
  • Using Plain Language to Communicate Health Information We know that Americans are going online for health information. We also know that nearly 9 in 10 adults struggle with health literacy. Health literacy—how well people can understand and use health information—ensures that health information and services can be accessed, understood, and used by people in their daily lives. Many hard-to-change factors, such as education, language, and age, affect health literacy. But we can change how we communicate health information. For more information, www.howto.gov and follow DigitalGov University at Presenter: Stacy Robison, CommunicateHealth, Inc. Produced by DigitalGov University, an initiative of the General Services Administration.
  • Teaching Deductively Here a teacher demonstrates the deductive, teacher directive method
  • What is a Valid Agument_HD.mp4 - YouTube.mp4 Video for Open Course Library Logic (PHIL&106), developed by Paul Herrick & Mark Storey
  • The puppy wants stars.... i don't even know. i didn't make it :D
  • 100% Proof God Exists This video gives three formally valid and sound deductive arguments which conclusively proves the existence of God. The first comes from the works of world renowned philosophers Charles Hartshourne and Alvin Plantinga (who are both deists). The second is my own argument and it is a tautology proven with a truth table. The third is also my own which deductively proves the existence of the Judeo-Christian God. All works belong to their respectful owners.
  • The Direct Method Now test your self : 1/ under the direct method grammar is taught: A. Deductively. B. Directly. C. Inductively. D. Indirectly. 2/ under the direct method the teacher is: A. A partner. B. A friend. C. A supervisor. D. A communicator. 3/ one of the most frequently used techniques under the direct method is: A. Asking questions B. Answer questions. C. Reading silently. D. Reading aloud. 4/ conversation practice under the direct method is: A. Asking question in L2. B. Working in groups. C. Using L1 and L2. D. Drills practice. 5/ under the direct method the syllabus is based on: A. Repetition and rills. B. Context and situations. C. Communication. D. Comprehension. 6/ under the direct method learners: A. Figure out L2 rules. B. Learn L2 rules. C. Apply L2 rules. D. Understand L2 rules. 7/ the direct method works on: A. Developing speaking. B. To learn grammar. C. To develop cognition. D. To write texts. 8/ the direct method favors: A. Comprehension first. B. Written expression first. C. Vocabulary first. D. Spoken language first.
  • MrEhid (ex-gore53) and His Confusion On The Issue of Sin, and the Duties of the Holy Spirit. Gore53 says he has been a Christian for 30 years. This truth means nothing to any discerning Christian who has followed the Biblical mandate to "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." - (2 Timothy 2:15) Appealing to the number of years one has been a Christian, in order to perpetuate any knowledge you might possess, is committing the Formal Logical Fallacy - Appeal to Authority - (argumentum ad verecundiam) deductively fallacious; even legitimate authorities speaking on their areas of expertise may affirm a falsehood. It does not matter how long one has been a Christian - if you don't know and understand the Systematic Theology of doctrines taught in the Scriptures, you can be a minister in a pulpit, and get it wrong. This is the constant cry of the, so called "Grace Believers" on YouTube. None of them go to a formal church, because none of the pulpit pimps know what they are talking about.....according to them, that is. gore53 is no different. He, as you can clearly hear in this video, gets it wrong on the "God is not imputing sin to you!" issue. Now, while this might be true in the life of a Christian, it is NOT TRUE in the life of the Unbeliever. In the life of the Unbeliever, God is INDEED imputing their sin to them, being the natural children of Adam. This is one of the dreadful and tragic "doctrines" being taught by Hyper-Dispensationalists. They will tell an Unbeliever this lie, then ...
  • Webinar with Sir Michael Barber: 'Oceans of Innovation' Webinar with Sir Michael Barber on his new essay 'Oceans of Innovation', hosted by Teach For All. For more global insights on transforming education visit:
  • Correlationist Someone who takes many ideas on the same subject and deductively reasons the closet truth known to man kind.
  • Puppy love Zorro shows Donny all about 'Barbara', a deductively valid logical form.
  • Teach Astronomy - Deduction Deduction is a way of combining observations or statements made in science logically. Deduction provides a very strong way of connecting observations with a conclusion. Typically we start with premises and combine them to draw conclusions. For example, if based on measurement I decided that the sun is larger then the Earth and independently that the Earth is larger then the moon, I could deductively conclude that the sun is larger then the moon. In a sense deduction contains no more information then is provided in the two statements, but it's a powerful and watertight way of combining different pieces of information. It does however depend on the premises being correct. If either premise is wrong the conclusion is invalid. Arithmetic is an example of a deductive system, and we can see that deduction is powerful and watertight. The statement 2 + 2 = 4 does not apply just on Fridays or when there is a "y" in the month. It is true always and forever. It is a part of the apparatus of arithmetic.
  • Atheist exclusivism and moments in atheist history. Check this Oxford university website: And here is the 20th century history of Atheism: Quote: "Atheism in the Marxist form is repudiated by many modern atheists, who regard Marxism as a sort of religion itself. Nevertheless, it cannot be ignored as having had a massive impact on how widespread atheism is today." I am by no means talking about atheist here in america but never the less there is a legacy that must be remembered. I don't pretend to conflate atheists with all of communism but there is a fair amount of atheists who wish to conflate the heterodox actions of Christians who are not following the teachings of Jesus Christ. The very core of communism was a belief in evolution and deep hatred of all things Religious. If you question why some people are prejudice and discriminate against atheists then remember recent history. www.hawaii.edu Note just the USSR and China figures. This is clear evidence and a deductively valid issue as to why atheism is feared and considered dangerous. The greatest activator for hatred of atheism is any issue dealing with hatred of religion. China would like to crush all religion but I suggest they are barely tolerating religion because of pressure from other nations. As it is this potential super power does not have the greatest human rights record. If atheists like Christopher Hitchens want to kill the poison that is religion then I suggest it is not helping atheists to be ...
  • 01 Resurrection This is the work of Neville Goddard who wrote a book entitled "Resurrection" .
  • UFOS! ORBS! OVNI! Presenting Two Happy Orbs From Eugene, Oregon! We welcome 2012portal.blogspot.ca 2012 and their friends! I am not interested in opening a forum for CIRCULAR REASONING artists and their blanket throw-away comments. If anyone remembers their writing 101 classes and FORGOT what CIRCULAR REASONING is, I have just what you are looking for below: CIRCULAR REASONING: Circular reasoning From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Circular reasoning (also known as paradoxical thinking or circular logic), is a logical fallacy in which "the reasoner begins with what he or she is trying to end up with".[1] A circular argument will always be logically valid because if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true, and will not lack relevance. Circular logic cannot prove a conclusion because, if the conclusion it doubted, the premise which leads to it will also be doubted.[2] Academic Douglas Walton used the following example of a fallacious circular argument: "Wellington is in New Zealand. Therefore, Wellington is in New Zealand"[3] He notes that, although the argument is deductively valid, it cannot prove that Wellington is in New Zealand because it contains no evidence that is distinct from the conclusion. The context - that of an argument - means that the proposition does not meet the requirement of proving the statement, thus it is a fallacy. He proposes that the context of a dialogue determines whether a circular argument is fallacious: if it forms part of an argument ...
  • Sherlock Holmes -- Science Study Break Dr. Jim Bryant (Biology) and Dr. Sam Gosling (Psychology) illustrate the master sleuth's use of statistics and observations of personality in this Science Study Break. About Science Study Break Pop culture and the academy collide as Science Study Break features researchers from The University of Texas at Austin discussing the science reality in books, television and film. Past presentations have examined bioterrorism and its treatment in the Fox thriller "24," artificial intelligence gone wild in "2001: A Space Odyssey," the comic realities of Spider-Man and epidemiological models for the proliferation of zombies. Science Study Break takes place twice each semester and is generously supported by the University Federal Credit Union.
  • ***ogy and Enum Induction_HD.mp4 - YouTube.mp4 Video for Open Course Library Logic (PHIL&106), developed by Paul Herrick & Mark Storey

Blogs & Forum
blogs and forums about deductively

  • “One can work that out deductively, one does not need empirical evidence. As in all IEA publications, the views expressed in this blog are those of the authors and not those of the”
    — IEA Blog,

  • “Top message: look I can do this too by Willwise Jan 6, 2007, 8:19 PM you must also be a *** star, deductively. Report to moderator. Replies. No replies to this”
    — Shop Talk (Phone Scoop),

  • “well i don't know what's the difference between Deductively Valid and Inductively forceful, but I do know the Profile Blog # On March 09 2007 13:41 CC Rider wrote: well i don't know what's the difference between Deductively Valid and”
    — Any logicians? I need something explained,

  • “Prep for USMLE Forum " USMLE Step 2 CK Forum " Psychiatry Forum " Piaget " Piaget stage4 (2) Reason deductively, define concepts. stage1 (3) Object permanence is achieved”
    — Piaget, prep4

  • “Welcome to MUBS Staff Blog. There are all categories of blogs in here. World over, universities are developing their programme structures and courses deductively (outside in) as opposed to inductively (inside out)”
    — MUBS Staff Blogs, blog.mubs.ac.ug

  • “This is the oldest deductively valid argument in surviving literature. the first to (a) write down a deductively valid argument, and (b) formulate the principle”
    — : Logic Archives,

  • “ "Some S is P" is known to be true, then it does not deductively follow that "Some S is not P" is true" since sometimes when we Is Mr. Kristol's reasoning deductively certain? " This (a study showing all the officers in a precinct in New”
    — Lee Archie - Notes on Logic:,

  • “Deductively Valid. Deductively Invalid. Popper concluded that it is impossible to know that a theory is true Deductively Invalid. Deductively Invalid. That is, if the predicted observation (O) turns out to be false, we can deduce only that”
    — Being Scientific: Fasifiability, Verifiability, Empirical,

  • “Auch haben wir ein gleichermaßen grossartiges englisches Blog unter of the readers of this blog are actually speed readers, so let's. try "normal". We are in”
    — petsicon blog,

Keywords
related keywords for deductively