| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "LOGIC PERCEPTION": |
|
|
Logic and Perception, 2005.
A look at the nature of logic and perception and the relationship between them.
900 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper looks at the nature of logic and perception, and the relationship between logic, critical thinking, and perception. It looks at principles of logical reasoning, perceptual inference, rationality, and perceptual blocks.
From the Paper
"Science is based on logic, yet it is also based on perception and observations. Logic is often seen as a form of deception - a way to trick the mind into believing something without proof, whereas observations appear to be more reliable because people tend to agree that seeing is believing. However, perception is a preliminary acquisition of data without testing or evaluation applied, whereas logic is the application of reason and critical thinking to the observation. Logic is the test of accuracy and is therefore the..."
| |
|
Logic, Critical Thinking and the Specter of Perception, 2005.
A look at the importance of logic to the critical thinking process.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 3 sources, $ 26.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how logic is, quite simply, one of the most important elements of the critical thinking process and how it is the opposite extreme from empiricism and permits the agile mind to balance the often-irrational beliefs created through empirical observation with more intellectual rigor. It looks at how logic becomes a lens through which we can filter the sometimes irrational and contradictory beliefs that our perceptions generate and which our brains entrench and how logic has the great potential to temper the passions of perception in the mind.
| |
|
Hume on Perception and Knowledge, 2003.
Examines philosopher David Hume's exploration into the fabric of our lives and the very nature of everything we believe and encounter.
1,778 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 57.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper shows how David Hume asserts that necessary connections are not logically necessary and are fabrications of the mind to create convenience and simplicity. Resemblance and memory lead to conjunctions of our perception with belief, but fail to remove any sense of doubt. The paper explores how Hume?s philosophical work is almost entirely skeptic in nature; yet, we see how by the nature of being human, Hume consequently desires pleasing his inherent wanting for understanding our world.
From the Paper
"Hume?s phenomenalism and his aversion to inductive reasoning is the foundation of a skeptical approach to the world that he adopts. While many argue that David Hume is not perpetually skeptical on everything, it appears clear that most of our perceptions and interpretations are brought into doubt when applying Hume?s empiricist model of our understanding."
| |
|
The Necessity for Paraconsistency in Deontic Logic, 2003.
A short critique of the current form of Deontic Logic, focusing on the work of Ernst Mally, followed by an argument for the integration of some central aspects of Paraconsistent Logic to the already existing systems of Deontic Logic.
1,090 words (approx. 4.4 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 38.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper briefly introduces the reader to the history and current state of Deontic Logic, a formal system that attempts to formalize moral judgment by exploiting the apparent similarity between the modal operators of alethic logic, necessity and possibility and two basic concepts of morality, obligation and permissibility. The paper lays out the basic structure of Deontic Logic and critiques it through examples that show that certain conclusions reached by applications of the logic are contradictory. It then shows that integration of paraconsistency into the logic will lessen the currently catastrophic effect of these contradictions.
From the Paper
"Most non-classical logics, supplemental or rival, have been proposed as improvements on classical logic, or are based on systems which were created to this end. Even those which claim completely different universes of discourse than classical logic, such as the epistemic, deontic, or tense systems, are generally founded on principles of a system which is in some way rival (in the informal sense) to classical logic (in their case, alethic modal logic). But, rarely, a proposed system (and its manner of departure from classical logic) seems more intuitively applicable as a correction to another proposed non-classical system than to classical logic itself. Such is the situation present in the relationship between Deontic logic, the system of formalized ethical judgement, and Paraconsistent logic, the system of turbulent belief-sets."
| |
|
Logic and Meaning for a Missionary, 2006.
An analysis of the applications of logic and meaning in the course of a missionary's work.
2,500 words (approx. 10.0 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 75.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses the importance of a missionary employing logic and meaning. The paper begins by defining meaning and logic. It then looks specifically at inductive and deductive logic and Eastern and Western logic. The paper discusses how each of these can be applied to daily life and how they should be employed by a missionary in the course of his work.
Table of Contents:
Introduction
Meaning
Deductive Logic
Inductive Logic
Western Logic
Eastern Logic
Life Application
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Inductive preaching is the reverse of deductive preaching. With this method, the preacher moves from context to text. They lead into the truth after interacting with the people. It is most effective with people towards the middle of the Engel Scale - those all the way at the negative end don't respond well to this, but those heading towards salvation and shortly after it seem to benefit most from these sorts of sermons. Done properly, it should expose the text of the Bible in the world of the listeners. Windsor compares it to watching a Polaroid develop. It generally feels less like a sermon. A Biblical example of this can be found in Acts 17 (Paul at Athens)."
| |
|
Logical Framework, 2007.
A research paper on logical framework, the method of framing the growth of national and global plans.
3,403 words (approx. 13.6 pages), 11 sources, MLA, $ 96.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper explores whether the use of logical framework during the project cycle in developing countries is because of its intrinsic value or merely because it is a donor requirement. Concerned with the importance, exploitation and launch of the concept of logical framework analysis (LFA), the paper highlights some of the important structural features involved in framing an efficient LFA. The paper discusses some of the essential conditions needed by the LFA and their employees in connection with the project planning matrix. Finally, the paper shows the value and important uses of the logical framework.
Outline:
Objectives
Background of Logical Framework
Stages in Logical Framework
Situation Analysis
Strategy Analysis
Project Planning Matrix (PPM)
Implementation
Problems in the Development of LF
Benefits of Utilizing Logical Framework System
Problems With the Logical Framework System
Conclusion
From the Paper
"Logical Framework (LF) was first established by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to act as a helping tool in the creating, structuring, development and administration of its solitary or joint national/global ventures (Coleman, 1987, p. 251). Its importance lies in its ability to chain and categorize a variety of logical methods and circumstances that could be a result of any plan before its initiation. Due to his efficient feature, LF has been used regularly by organizations all over in tailored outlines (Pfenning and Schurmann, 1999)."
| |
|
Logical Fallacies in the Media, 2006.
An understanding of logical fallacies by finding four logical fallacies of two types in the media.
810 words (approx. 3.2 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper demonstrates techniques that exist in the media that present facts and events that cause those viewing or listening to the media to respond in predictable ways. The paper reports how these 'logical fallacies' are very effective techniques for drawing forth the desired response from news media observers.
Outline:
Objective
Introduction
I. Argumentum Ad Populum
II. Argumentum Ad Misericordiam
III. The Anonymous Authority
Summary and Conclusion
From the Paper
"Argumentum Ad Populum refers to that which is a commonly held belief. One example of this is the supposed fact, as touted by news media and the present Washington Administration that the country of Iraq had 'weapons of mass destruction' which where a threat to the national security and safety of the United States. In fact an entire war was based on these 'weapons of mass destruction' which have been found to most definitely 'not' exist. This use of the technique of 'Argumentum Ad Populum' has been used in the past by the government but not to this great extent or to the cost in terms of lives that these logical fallacies perpetrated. "
| |
|
The Fourth Figure of Logic, 2002.
Explores the significance of the fourth figure of logic and examines Aristotle's intentional exclusion of the fourth figure.
2,150 words (approx. 8.6 pages), 7 sources, $ 80.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explores the significance of the fourth figure in respect to its application within logic and logic theory, where the fourth figure is typically ignored because of its inherent confusion due to a general lack of clarity in formulation. A discussion of Aristotle's intentional exclusion of this fourth figure in the study of logic is examined in addition to the general discussion, where this paper shall argue that Aristotle disliked the use of the fourth figure because it was less clear than the other three major forms.
| |
|
?The Nature and Logic of Capitalism?, 2002.
A review of the book ?The Nature and Logic of Capitalism? by Robert L. Heilbroner.
1,184 words (approx. 4.7 pages), 1 source, MLA, $ 40.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines how Robert L. Heilbroner, in "The Nature and Logic of Capitalism", struggles with three difficult-to-define words --?nature?, ?logic? and ?capitalism? and comes to some startling, if not revealing, opinions on capitalism. It evaluates his theory that ?nature? is the innate ability or power to create relationships and it wields this ability in a structured ?logic?, the end result, which is a ?regime? known as ?capitalism.? It looks at how he analyzes capitalism not as a ?mere economic system? but as a ?regime.? A ?regime,? indicating a ruling power structure empowered to make and enforce change.
From the Paper
"Heilbroner, acknowledging and confirming Marx, then posits the theory that competition among capitalists, left unchecked, would drive profits to zero. Marx stopped at this point, satisfied with his theories of the challenges of surplus value. Heilbroner takes Marx further by suggesting that Marx?s ?factors of production" (land, labor, capital) are not comparable or equivalent entities and produce wealth only when workers act upon land. That is the ?nature? of the beast. Heilbroner, then, sees the ?logic? of this ?nature? as having several distinctive features. The first was that capitalists, as holders of social power, were independent of the state's control ever the means of production, and over the socializing ?nature? of the state."
| |
|
Logical Fallacies in Business Reporting, 2004.
Discusses three types of logical fallacies in business reporting from a critical thinking perspective.
1,383 words (approx. 5.5 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 46.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Although the reporting of facts and figures is often thought of as an objective science, quite frequently even business reporting is characterized by logical fallacies, including but not limited to, appeals to ignorance, hasty generalizations, and ad hominem attacks. This paper argues that these logical fallacies are particularly common and pernicious in business reporting because of the frequently technically complex nature of the subject matter in regards to facts and figures, combined with the emotional texture of business reporting that involves the fabric and texture of individual lives. The paper shows that reporters wish to attract attention and render complexities comprehensible, but frequently fall into logically fallacious traps to accomplish these objectives. The paper provides examples from business reports to elaborate on the ideas.
From the Paper
"This is particularly important to remember when reading the business section about distasteful individuals, because it is tempting to assume, when hearing about past dirty dealings, to either discount all of the information brought up by the person, because of the past character of the potential economic criminal, or to assume that he or she knew everything about the dark corporate dealings at the company. Even the lack of evidence is made to sound dark in the above-cited article?s rhetoric: ?Considering that he was the driving force behind Enron's growth, the micromanaging former CEO did an amazing job of distancing himself from its decline. He stopped selling stock four months before Enron collapsed?and left the company entirely two months beforehand. He rarely used e-mail. His signature is conspicuously, and uncharacteristically, absent from the approval sheets for some of Fastow's most controversial deals.? (?Who Will Fastow implicate?? January 19, 2004, Business Week Online retrieved on January 19, 2004 at http://www.aol.businessweek.com/bwdaily/index.html#top) The ad hominem attack is generally used as a kind of intellectual shorthand, equating man with message, rather than trying to understand the business at hand."
| |
|
Logical Fallacies, 2005.
A look at how logical fallacies confront people in all aspects of life and the harm they can do do our decision-making process.
774 words (approx. 3.1 pages), 3 sources, APA, $ 27.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper describes how logical fallacies can affect us in academic and scientific research and even in the decisions we make in everyday life. The paper points out that a very valuable skill in making decisions is the ability to identify logical fallacies and to apply tools that help you identify them. Moreover, the paper describes some types of logical fallacies and some of the tools for identifying them, as well.
From the Paper
"There is little question that logical or analytical fallacies can (and have) plagued data analysts in all major fields of knowledge from the beginning of recorded time. Not only can these fallacies of reason cause immense harm due to their capacity to mislead, but they can also ruin an otherwise sound argument or conclusion. For this reason, it is important to utilize varied ?tools? designed to prevent or detect fallacies."
| |
|
Logical Fallacies, 2004.
A look at the application of logical fallacies with three examples known as 'straw man', 'equivocation', and 'ad hominem'.
1,057 words (approx. 4.2 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 37.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
Logical fallacies are methods of argumentation or persuasion that, in simplest terms, look or sound good, but do not stand up to critical analysis. This paper explains that, although there are more, three very commonly used examples of logical fallacies are 'straw man', 'equivocation' and 'ad hominem'. It shows how these fallacies are frequently used to get people to agree to desired proposals or plans. They are often used when those doing the proposing either are not sure their facts are strong enough to get cooperation or those doing the proposing are sure that people will not agree because the proposals are not honest/necessary or useful to begin with.
From the Paper
"The straw man fallacy includes such approaches as stereotyping, caricaturing, name-calling, slanted language or deck-stacking. Basically the idea is to portray your opponent as weak so that your own arguments look stronger. Reporting the opposing views in overly simplified terms or in concepts that are absurd are relied on to make the opinion or position offered by those employing the technique, seem stronger and more sensible."
| |
|
Justifying Beliefs by Logical Implication, 2002.
A description of the need for logical implication between a justification and a belief within a justified-true-belief theory of knowledge.
3,530 words (approx. 14.1 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 99.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
An argument that for a justified true belief theory of knowledge to work, the justification component must be such that an acceptable justification logically implies the truth of the content of the belief. The paper first shows how weaker views of justification will always be susceptible to counterexamples like Gettier's and Feldman's. The paper then shows how the notion of justification defined above makes it impossible to have counterexamples and then make a case for why the strong view is appropriate, even given that it probably leads to skepticism. The nature of justification within a viable theory of knowledge needs to have the strength of logical implication, and as such may have to lead to skeptical considerations.
From the Paper
"The characterization of knowledge as justified true belief is a very powerful concept, and despite the assorted difficulties that arise in definitions that equate knowledge with justified true belief, such definitions still seem the most intuitively plausible starting points for a theory of knowledge. It is fairly obvious that one cannot know that p if one does not believe that p, and it is equally indisputable that p has to be true for one to be able to know it. It is that whole "justified" bit that is the tricky part and that tends to mess things up for justified true belief (JTB) theories of knowledge. In this paper I hope to offer a characterization of justification within the framework of a JTB theory of knowledge that leads to a cohesive theory of what is required for one to have knowledge, one that is not subject to the loopholes and weaknesses that lead other JTB theories to incorrectly admit certain beliefs as knowledge. Specifically, I will claim that for one's belief that p to constitute knowledge that p, one's justification j for believing that p must be such that (i) j logically implies p, and (ii) every statement within the justification is true. I will argue that such a strong notion of justification is needed for a JTB theory to avoid being susceptible to counterexamples like those offered in Edmund Gettier's famous paper and elsewhere. Further, I will contend that for a JTB theory to work, the concept of justification must be such that in considerations of "justified beliefs," "justified" works, in the words of Peter Unger, as an absolute term. I will then use this later point to allay concerns, which are certainly valid, that the strong notion of justification I am presenting in this paper directly leads to skepticism."
| |
|
Logical Fallacy and Critical Thinking, 2004.
A look at the relationship between logical fallacies, critical thinking and decision-making.
904 words (approx. 3.6 pages), 4 sources, APA, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews relationships between logical fallacies, critical thinking, and decision-making. The paper also identifies three logical fallacies and looks at how critical thinking is applied to the decision-making process with regard to each fallacy.
From the Paper
"In this paper three logical fallacies are defined. The significance of each logical fallacy to the process of critical thinking is explained and the general application of critical thinking to decision-making with respect to each logical fallacy is discussed. A logical fallacy is an argument that is defective because of faulty reasoning. Essentially, a logical fallacy occurs when one draws a conclusion from statements that do not in fact support the conclusion. The presence of a logical fallacy does not necessarily..."
| |
|
Logical Fallacies, 2005.
A discussion on logical fallacies and the use of them in President Bush's campaign.
920 words (approx. 3.7 pages), 6 sources, MLA, $ 31.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper examines President Bush's use of logical fallacies in his presidential debates with Democratic candidate John Kerry. It defines and describes the three logical fallacies used by Bush namely, the Appeal to Pity, the Bandwagon Argument and the Red Herring. The author provides examples from these debates.
From the Paper
"Logical Fallacies are most basically defined as flaws in reasoning typically used in an argumentative chain of statements. Analyzing the set of assumptions that underlie a chain of argumentative statements is the bedrock of critical thinking. Fallacies are of ..."
|
|
|
