phil 347n Week 4 Assignment journal.

Running head: WEEK 4 JOURNAL 1 Week 4 Assignment: Journal Chamberlain University College of Nursing PHIL347N: Critical Reasoning March 28, 2021 This study source was downloaded by from CourseH on :49:16 GMT -05:00 This study resource was shared via CourseH Running head: WEEK 4 JOURNAL 2 In critical thinking, to draw a reasonable conclusion, a person must use inductive or deductive reasoning (Facione & Gittens, 2016). Because these reasoning can be easily mix up, the lexical and connotation meaning of “valid” and “warranted” can help an individual have a clearer understanding on how to differ purposes of inductive and deductive arguments. Every person has an idea of what the words “valid” or “warranted” mean. However, according to the dictionary “valid” is something that produces the desired result, and the word “warranted” is something that is justified (Merriam-Webster 2021). These dictionary definitions are called lexical. In addition to the primary meaning, the idea or feeling that a word produces is called connotation, which it is mostly used in everyday communication. In deductive argument, the person that states a claim makes use of premises that are accurate, or “valid,” to make an overall declaration of a particular case. Our textbook suggests that the premises are valid, then, it is only logical to assume the conclusion is also valid or true (Facione & Gittens, 2016). Whereas, inductive arguments make use of precise observations to simplify the premises. In the case of warranted arguments, new data can lead us to rethink our conclusions without changing the original premises (Facione & Gittens, 2016, p.175). Therefore, the definitions help us to have a clearer comprehension about inductive arguments because it uses warranted observations to set up a probable conclusion