How to Argue - Induction & Abduction: Crash Course Philosophy

The video explores different types of reasoning: induction, abduction, and philosophical argumentation. It highlights the strengths and limitations of inductive reasoning, using examples like aspirin's effectiveness and the grue paradox. Abductive reasoning is introduced through Sherlock Holmes' method of eliminating the impossible. The video concludes with a discussion on philosophical argumentation, emphasizing the Socratic method and the pursuit of truth.

What is the main limitation of deductive reasoning as discussed in the video?

• It requires specific information to reach a conclusion.

• It relies on past experiences.

• It provides uncertain answers.

• It is not useful in everyday life.

Why is inductive reasoning important in predicting future events?

• It guarantees accurate predictions.

• It relies on the predictability of nature.

• It uses specific premises to reach conclusions.

• It eliminates all false possibilities.

What is a potential problem with inductive reasoning?

• It is not based on any evidence.

• The future may not always resemble the past.

• It cannot be used for predictions.

• It always leads to false conclusions.

How does abduction differ from deduction and induction?

• It rules out possibilities to find the best explanation.

• It relies on general premises.

• It uses past evidence to predict the future.

• It provides certain conclusions.

In the example of Anna, what is the most plausible explanation for her absence in physics class?

• She is sick.

• She dropped the class.

• She changed her major.

• She forgot about the class.

What is the Socratic method primarily used for in philosophical discussions?

• To discredit opponents.

• To find truths through dialogue.

• To win arguments.

• To avoid counterarguments.

What is the role of interlocutors in a philosophical argument?

• To win the debate.

• To avoid giving reasons.

• To provide counterarguments.

• To agree with each other.