Inferred information

Inferred information

Infering means to take what you know and make a guessthe practice of inferring the meaning of an unfamiliar word or expression from the meaning of familiar words occurring with it in a context together with one's knowledge of or beliefs about the world.

Inference is the act or process of deriving a conclusion based solely on what one already knows.Inferences are either valid or invalid, but not both. Philosophical logic has attempted to define the rules of proper inference, i.e. the formal rules that, when correctly applied to true premises, lead to true conclusions. Greek philosophers defined a number of syllogisms, correct three-part inferences, that can be used as building blocks for more complex reasoning. We'll begin with the most famous of them all:

All men are mortal

Socrates is a man

Therefore Socrates is mortal.

The validity of an inference depends on the form of the inference. That is, the word "valid" does not refer to the truth of the premises or the conclusion, but rather to the form of the inference. An inference can be valid even if the parts are false, and can be invalid even if the parts are true. But a valid form with true premises will always have a true conclusion.For example, consider the form of Modus Ponens:

All A are B

C is A

Therefore C is B

For the conclusion to be necessarily true, the premises need to be true.
Now we turn to an invalid form.

All A are B.

C is a B.

Therefore C is an A.

To show that this form is invalid, we demonstrate how it can lead from true premises to a false conclusion.All apples are fruit. (true)

Bananas are fruit. (true)

Therefore bananas are apples. (false)

Incorrect inference

An incorrect inference is known as a fallacy. Philosophers who study informal logic have compiled large lists of them, and cognitive psychologists have documented many biases in human reasoning that favor incorrect reasoning.

There are three types of inference:
Deductive reasoning, finding the effect with the cause and the rule.
Abductive reasoning, finding the cause with the rule and the effect.
Inductive reasoning, finding the rule with the cause and the effect.

An example
Hooke's law is the rule that gives the elongation of a beam (that's an effect) when a force (that's the cause) is acting on a beam.
If the force and Hooke's law are known, the elongation of the beam can be deduced.
If the elongation and Hooke's law are known, the force acting on the beam can be abduced. If the elongation and the force are known, Hooke's law can be induced.

THANK YOU ^^,

Huachin , Cesar