Reasoning or logic is the most important quality of any causal analysis.

A、Graph theory

B、Logic

C、Topology

D、Operation research

A、Slippery slope

B、Hasty generalization

C、Circular reasoning

D、Bangwagon appeal

A、It refers to the explanation of why or how the data supports the claim, the underlying assumption that connects your data to your claim.

B、It refers to the evidence that negates or disagrees with the counterclaim.

C、It refers to the additional logic or reasoning that may be necessary to support the rebuttal.

D、It refers to the overall thesis the writer will argue for and the evidence gathered to support the claim.

Week 9 For the following three or four weeks, you are going to review some of the writing skills you have learned during the previous 8 weeks. What you need to do each week is watch the related video clip and write a short essay of no less than 200 words. This week, we are going to focus back on argumentation(in Unit 1). Argumentation is a genre of writing that requires you to investigate a topic, to collect and evealutate evidence, and to establish a position on the topic in a concise and logical manner. It is a strategy we often employ to develop a paragraph or an essay. In argumentation, we take a stand on the issue; we either state our position in the topic sentence and then inmmediately present a major argument against us, or directly introduce the rival argument in the very first sentence. Then we support our stand with good reasons and support our reasons with good evidences. We are supposed to attack fiercely with clear position and powerful criticism, but also carefully with logical reasoning and kindly with respect for the sensible part of the opposing position. In other words, use hard arguments but soft words, point out common ground, and avoid logic fallacy. A good argument consists of 5 elements: an explanation of the issue (introduction), a clear thesis statement (your stand), arguments with solid evidence (arguments), rubuttals to the opposing arguments (rebuttals) and restatements of your arguments (restatements). Now choose one of the following topics and develop it into an essay of no less than 200 words. 1. As a 20-year-old, I strongly believe in expressing my own individuality rather than trying to be “just like everybody else” (OR: believe in confrming to the customs and practices of our society rather than expressing my individuality). 2. It is quite a popular belief that the current method of selecting students for higher education should be eliminated, but I believe in the contrary.

The two most common kinds of logic or reasoning are inductive and deductive.

Inductive reasoning is mainly scientific and factual it begins with collected data,experiments. and examples.When enough information has been colleted,a statement of aprinciple is taken from the examples.

Deductive reasoning begins with a general principle and applies it to a specifie instance or specific instances The conclusions of deduetive thinkers are more tentative than the conclusions of inductive thinkers, who arrive at a principle instead of starting from one.Deductive thinkers are accurate only to the extent that their principle is correct and only to the extent that they have applied it truly.

Both inductive thinking and deductive thinking are tested. and questioned by those to whom the conclusions are presented. Of an inductive thinker,one asks whether the facts are true. whether the exceptions have been noted, whether the selection of materials is representative. whether the conclusions are truly and accurately drawn from the data,whether the conclusions are stated precisely or exaggerated(夸大的). Of a deductive thinker, one asks whether the given principle is impartial truth or mere personal opinion,whether it is applied to materials relevantly,whether the conclusion is accurate according to the principie, and whether exceptions have been noted.

With good motives and bad, with bonesty and with deceit. different thinkers teach different conclusions derived from the same data or from the same principle. What is the difference between inductive thinking and deductive thinking？

A.Inductive thinking starts from data, experiments and examples and then arrives at a principle,while deductive thinking starts only from data

B.Inductive thinking starts from a principle,and then applies it to a specifie instance or specific instances, while deductive thinking starts from data experiments and examples and then arrives at a principle

C.Inductive thinking starts from data, experiments and examples and then arrives at a principle,while deductive thinking starts from a general principle,and then applies it to a specific instance or specific instances

D.Inductive thinking starts from data and then applies them to specific instances,while deduetive thinking starts from experiments and then appliesthem to specific instances

Which one of the following should an inductive thinker pay attention to？A.Whether the general principle is impartial truth or mere personal opinion.

B.Whether he is honest or not.

C.Whether the facts are true or not

D.Whether the general principle is applied to material relevantly.

The common concern for inductive thinkers and deductive thinkers is___A.whether the exceptions have been noticed

B.whether they are bearing good motives or not

C.whether the conclusions are derived from the same data

D.whether they starts from the same general principle

Which statement among the following is true？A.Deductive thinking is mainly scientific and factual

B.The deductive thinkers will never be accurate

C.Both inductive thinking and deductive thinking are tested and questioned by those to whom the conclusions are presented

D.One will not care about whether the facts used by an inductive thinker are representative or not

请帮忙给出每个问题的正确答案和分析，谢谢！

A、causal reasoning

B、analogical reasoning

C、reasoning from principle

D、none of the above

Which logic, inductive or deductive logic, is used by the logic professor in the following conversation？ _____________ The employer introduced himself to his new gardener. “I am a professor of logic,” the employer said. “Oh. What’s that？” the gardener asked. “I shall give you a demonstration,” announced the professor. “Do you own a wheelbarrow？” “Yes,” replied the gardener. “Then I infer you are a hard worker,” the professor continued. “And from that fact I infer you have a family. And from that I infer you are conscientious and responsible. And from that I infer you are a conservative. Am I right？” “Wow!” exclaimed the gardener. “That’s right! So that’s logic？” “That’s logic,” preened the professor.

A、inductive

B、deductive

C、-

D、-

A.achieve

B.manage

C.investor

D.logic

raw correct conclusions. Unfortunately, errors frequently occur, and we are not talking about simple carelessness as occurs when two numbers are incorrectly added, nor do we mean errors resulting from simple forgetfulness. Rather, we have in mind errors of a logic nature--those resulting from faulty reasoning. Now, or at least soon, computers will be capable of error-free logical reasoning in a variety of areas. The key to avoiding errors is to use a computer program that relies on the last two decades' research in the field of automated theorem proving. AURA (Automated Reasoning Assistant) is the program that best exemplifies this use of the computer.

AURA solves a problem by drawing conclusions from a given set of facts about the problem. Program does not learn, nor is it self-analytical, but it reaches logical conclusions flawlessly. It used various types of reasoning and, more important, has access to very powerful and sophisticated logical strategies. AURA seldom relies on brute force to find solutions. Instead it solves almost all problems by using sophisticated techniques to find a contradiction. One generally starts with a set of assumptions and adds a statement that the goal is unreachable. For example, if the problem is to test a safety system that automatically shuts down a nuclear reactor when instruments indicate a problem, AURA is told that the system will not shut the reactor down under those circumstances. If AURA finds a contradiction between the statement and the system's design assumptions, then this aspect of the reactor's design has been proved satisfactory. This strategy, known as the set of support strategy, lets AURA concentrate on the problem at hand and avoid the many fruitless steps required to explore the entire theory underlying the problem. Almost never does the program proceed by carrying out an exhaustive search.

The chief use for AURA at this time is for electronic circuit design validation, but a number of other uses will arise. For example, there already exist "expert systems" that include a component for reasoning. An expert system is a special purpose program designed to automate reasoning in a specific area such as medical diagnosis. These expert programs, unlike human experts, do not die. Such systems continue to improve and have an indefinite life span. Moreover, they can be replicated for pennies. A human who can expertly predict where to drill for oil is in great demand. A program that can predict equally well would be invaluable and could be duplicated any number of times.

Will the computer replace the human being？ Certainly not. It seems likely that computer programs will reproduce--that is, design more clever computer programs and more efficient, more useful components. Reasoning programs will also analyze their own progress, learn from their attempts to solve a problem, and redirect their attack on a problem. Such programs will assist, rather than replace, humans. Their impact will be felt in design, manufacturing, law, medicine, and other areas. Reasoning assistants will enable human minds to turn to deeper and far more complex ideas. These ideas will be partially formulated and then checked for reasoning flaws by a reasoning program. Many errors will be avoided.

The primary purpose of AURA is to

A．function as a safety mechanism in nuclear reactors.

B．detect contradictions and other faults in computer programs.

C．develop expert human programs for technical fields.

D．check human reasoning for possible errors.