sitaram raju kai atamsamrpan kai baad angrejo nai uskai sath kaisa vyavhaar kiya? in hindi.
Answers
Answer:
another statement, the conclusion.[1][2][3][4][5] The logical form of an argument in a natural language can be represented in a symbolic formal language, and independently of natural language formally defined "arguments" can be made in math and computer science.
statements (in a natural language), called the premises or premisses (both spellings are acceptable), intended to determine the degree of truth of
Logic is the study of the forms of reasoning in arguments and the development of standards and criteria to evaluate arguments.[6] Deductive arguments can be valid or sound: in a valid argument, premisses necessitate the conclusion, even if one or more of the premises is false and the conclusion is false; in a sound argument, true premises necessitate a true conclusion. Inductive arguments, by contrast, can have different degrees of logical strength: the stronger or more cogent the argument, the greater the probability that the conclusion is true, the weaker the argument, the lesser that probability.[7] The standards for evaluating non-deductive arguments may rest on different or additional criteria than truth—for example, the persuasiveness of so-called "indispensability claims" in transcendental arguments,[8] the quality of hypotheses in retroduction, or even the disclosure of new possibilities for thinking and acting.[9]
Etymology
Formal and informal
Standard types
Deductive
Inductive
Defeasible arguments and argumentation schemes
By analogy
Other kinds
Explanations
Fallacies and non-arguments
Elliptical or ethymematic arguments
See also
Notes
References
Further reading
Explanation:
ican be represented in a symbolic formal language, and independently of natural language formally defined "arguments" can be made in math and computer science.
statements (in a natural language), called the premises or premisses (both spellings are acceptable), intended to determine the degree of truth of
Logic is the study of the forms of reasoning in arguments and the development of standards and criteria to evaluate arguments.[6] Deductive arguments can be valid or sound: in a valid argument, premisses necessitate the conclusion, even if one or more of the premises is false and the conclusion is false; in a sound argument, true premises necessitate a true conclusion. Inductive arguments, by contrast, can have different degrees of logical strength: the stronger or more cogent the argument, the greater the probability that the conclusion is true, the weaker the argument, the lesser that probability.[7] The standards for evaluating non-deductive arguments may rest on different or additional criteria than truth—for example, the persuasiveness of so-called "indispensability claims" in transcendental arguments,[8] the quality of hypotheses in retroduction, or even the disclosure of new possibilities for thinking and acting.[9]
Etymology
Formal and informal
Standard types
Deductive
Inductive
Defeasible arguments and argumentation schemes
By analogy
Other kinds
Explanations
Fallacies and non-arguments
Elliptical or ethymematic arguments
See also
Notes
References
Further reading
yFallacies and non-arguments
Elliptical or ethymematic arguments
See also
Notes
References
Further reading
ican be represented in a symbolic formal language, and independently of natural language formally defined "arguments" can be made in math and computer science.
statements (in a natural language), called the premises or premisses (both spellings are acceptable), intended to determine the degree of truth of
Logic is the study of the forms of reasoning in arguments and the development of standards and criteria to evaluate arguments.[6] Deductive arguments can be valid or sound: in a valid argument, premisses necessitate the conclusion, even if one or more of the premises is false and the conclusion is false; in a sound argument, true premises necessitate a true conclusion. Inductive arguments, by contrast, can have different degrees of logical strength: the stronger or more cogent the argument, the greater the probability that the conclusion is true, the weaker the argument, the lesser that probability.[7] The standards for evaluating non-deductive arguments may rest on different or additional criteria than truth—for example, the persuasiveness of so-called "indispensability claims" in transcendental arguments,[8] the quality of hypotheses in retroduction, or even the disclosure of new possibilities for thinking and acting.[9]
Etymology
Formal and informal
Standard types
Deductive
Inductive
Defeasible arguments and argumentation schemes
By analogy
Other kinds
Explanations
Fallacies and non-arguments
Elliptical or ethymematic arguments
See also
Notes
References
Further reading