We will classify the three major types of inductive reasoning――generalization, analogy, and causal――and their associated fallacies.
Generalization
Generalization and analogy, which we consider in the next section, are the main tools by which we accumulate knowledge and analyze our world. Many people define generalization as inductive reasoning. In colloquial speech, the phrase to generalize carries a negative connotation. To argue by generalization, however, is neither inherently good nor bad. The relative validity of a generalization depends on both the context of the argument and the likelihood that its conclusion is true. Polling organizations make predictions by generalizing information from a small sample of the population, which hopefully represents the general population. The soundness of their predictions depends on how representative the sample is and on its size. Clearly, the less comprehensive a conclusion is the more likely it is to be true.
Example:
During the late seventies when Japan was rapidly expanding its share of the American auto market, GM surveyed owners of GM cars and asked them whether they would be more willing to buy a large, powerful car or a small, economical car. Seventy percent of those who responded said that they would prefer a large car. On the basis of this survey, GM decided to continue building large cars. Yet during the80s, GM lost even more of the market to the Japanese
【GMAT考试Testprep数学精解2】相关文章:
最新
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02
2016-03-02