abduction, induction and deduction

Trippy discussions of moral issues, conspiracy theories, the paranormal and other otherworldly phenomenon.

Moderator: Dracofrost

abduction, induction and deduction

Postby TerraFrost » Sat Jun 14, 2003 6:24 am

so deduction is like a formal proof that uses tautologies to go from one statement to the next... induction is a generalization of sorts, if i understand it correctly. what, then, is abduction?

and what would it be when you prove a statement to be true not by using tautologies, but by drawng out the truth table, and demonstrating by "brute force" that each and every combination results in the statement being true?
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby Gigafrost » Sat Jun 14, 2003 3:42 pm

Well, lemme see...

Abduction is attempting to explain the observation with a hypothesis. A good example would be dinosaur fossils. If you think about it, it doesn't come deductively from the bones that dinosaurs walked the earth, nor can you generalize about the bones to say dinosaurs walked. To explain the presence of the bones (observation) you could say that something died in the past and it was a dinosaur (hypothesis).

As for the "brute force" I would think that evaluating for each situation would still be using tautological rules and then "brute force" might just be a (generally) less effective method of deduction...maybe...
User avatar
Gigafrost
Frost Weapon
Frost Weapon
 
Posts: 4900
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 5:09 pm
Location: Here

Postby TerraFrost » Sat Jun 14, 2003 4:09 pm

ok... thanks for the clarification! :)
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am


Return to Twilight Zone

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron