The difference between logic and reasoning is that “logic” provides systematic framework for reasoning, it guides and determines the process of reasoning. In short, “logic” decides how should and under which standards one practice reasoning process. It sets certain standards and principles for cognitive process of drawing conclusion. On the other hand, “reasoning” is a mental or cognitive process of drawing logical conclusion on the basis of “premises” or interconnected and interdependent statements. And, If the reasoning process follows the standards of logic, it is termed as logical reasoning. Considering the large application of logic and reasoning in various fields, the concept clarity of these terms can’t be neglected.
Understanding logic, reasoning and argument
“Logic” is the set of rules and standards to determine the process of reasoning. Whether the process of reasoning is valid or invalid is determined by the set of standards set by “logic.” To put simple, if the conclusion drawn by reasoning is logically following from the given premises, we call it logical reasoning. And as per the rules of logic, if all the premises are true, then the derived conclusion can’t be false or deemed to be true.
In layman’s term, “reasoning” is nothing but just drawing logical conclusion from available knowledge. But, it should andhere to the standards of logic. It means conclusion should be consistent with premises. And, conclusion should logically follow the given premises. Then only the derived conclusion will be logical and valid and no chance for logical fallacy.
- 1.General premise: All birds are oviparous.
- Specific premise: Eagle is a bird.
- Conclusion : Therefore, eagle is a oviparous.
- 2.General premise: All lifty mountains are folded.
- Specific premise: Himalaya is a lofty mountain.
- Conclusion: Himalaya is a folded mountain.
Deductive and inductive reasoning
Deductive reasoning is a kind of logical process by which a conclusion is drawn from two or more premises. It is called top down reasoning approach as it uses general observations or principles to arrive at specific conclusion. Deductive reasoning may be valid, invalid, sound or unsound depending on premises and principles of logic.
On the other hand, Inductive reasoning is a type of logical reasoning in which conclusions are reached by inductive reasoning can’t be guaranteed to be true but probabilistic. It is a bottom up approach. It draws general conclusions by observing specific phenomenon or data. This method of reasoning allows individuals to form hypotheses and theories based on the patterns and trends they observe in real-world situations.
What are Logical fallacies
“Logical fallacy” is an error in reasoning process that leads to wrong or invalid argument. If the people don’t possess proper reasoning skills, try to manipulate or misguide others by giving faulty logic. Such manipulation by providing faulty logic is called logical fallacy.
“Ad hominem, Straw man, Slippery slope, False dilemma, Post hoc, ergo propter hoc, Appeal to authority, and Hasty generalization are some examples and types of logical fallacies.”
The argument: meaning, types and examples
Argument is a structure of premises and conclusion. It is a tool to persuade or convince people in favour of your point of view or opinion. Simply put, “argument” is a claim backed by supporting reasons and evidences. If it is logically derived from given premises, it is called “valid.” Or, if it doesn’t follow from the given premises, we term it “invalid.
Valid and sound arguments
Universally, deductive reasoning or argument is used to derive confirm conclusions. Simply, conclusion derived by the means of deductive reasoning can’t be probable but confirm. At the same time, validity and soundness depend on rules of logic as well as nature of premises used there.
Example of valid and sound arguments
- All herbivore are grass eater. (Claim)
- Cow is a herbivorous animal.(support)
- So, cow depends on grass for survival.(conclusion)
Technically, deductive argument is expressed by using conditional statements such as, if..then pattern.
Validity of deductive argument
Suppose, if the given premises are true of the argument, then, the conclusion reached can’t be incorrect. Rules and principles of logic state that when the premises or assumptions of arguments are true, then, the conclusion reached is deemed to be true.
For clarity, when the given premises of the argument are consistent with the conclusion reached, such argument are termed logically valid. But, when the given premises aren’t consistent with conclusion reached, the argument is termed as invalid.
What is invalid argument
- All mountains are geographical landforms.
- The Himalaya is landform.
- Hence, Himalaya is mountain.
- Sound and unsound arguments
Notably, a valid deductive argument can be either sound or unsound. If all the premises of the given valid argument are true, such deductive argument is termed as sound.
Unsound deductive argument
On the other hand, in case, there are one or two premises are false but other are true, such valid argument is termed as unsound. Clearly, argument is called sound when all the given premises are true. And, argument is termed unsound when some premises of the valid argument are false.
Besides, invalid deductive argument can be easily labelled as invalid due to inconsistent with the rules of logic. In addition, unlike inductive reasoning, deductive reasoning can be classified as valid or invalid subject to rules and principles of logic.
Strong and weak Vs valid and invalid conclusions
unlike deductive reasoning, in inductive reasoning, conclusions reached could be either termed as strong or weak in place of valid or invalid. As I mentioned earlier that inductive reasoning can’t be used to derive confirm conclusions but with probability. This is the reason why we term it as strong or weak conclusions.
But, in deductive reasoning, it is categorised as valid or invalid based on the logical principles. Most importantly, conclusions in the deductive reasoning can’t be probable but conclusive or confirm.
Cogent and Un Cogent conclusions
Understandably, in inductive reasoning, no conclusion could be invalid but with lower or higher degree of probability. If all the premises of inductive reasoning are true with strong probability of conclusions reached, it is termed as ”Cogent”argument.
But, in case of weak conclusions with some false premises, such inductive argument is labelled as “Un Cogent”. Simply, strong inductive argument are called “Cogent”, whereas, weak classified as “Un cogent”.
Deductive and inductive reasoning
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument
https://www.comm.pitt.edu/argument-basics