Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    The single-case induction analysis does nothing to advanc... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The single-case induction analysis of analogical reasoning is counter-productive

    The single-case induction analysis does nothing to advance criteria for distinguishing relevant from irrelevant similarities

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    A satisfactory analysis of analogical reasoning should help distinguish relevant...The single-case induction analysis of analogical reasoning is counter-productive

    Similar

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    The simplistic analysis of analogical argument as single-case inductio...89%Interpreting the argument from analogy as single-case induction is cou...88%Treating all analogical arguments as single-case induction is too rest...82%The single-case induction analysis of analogical reasoning is counter-...80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: reasoning-analogy
    View source passageHide passage
    Recasting analogy as a deductive argument may help to bring out background assumptions, but it makes little headway with the problem of justification. That problem re-appears as the need to state and establish the plausibility of a determination rule, and that is at least as difficult as justifying the original analogical argument. 2 Inductive justification Some philosophers have attempted to portray, and justify, analogical reasoning in terms of some well-understood inductive argument pattern.

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective