The Pros And Cons Of Logic And The Nature Of Knowledge

Since ancient Greece, philosophers have employed logic in their attempts determining what the actual nature of knowledge is and what people can know about it. Logic, as defined by Richard Popkin and Avrum Stroll is “the branch of philosophy that reflects upon the nature of thinking itself,” or the branch of philosophy used to understand the nature of ideas and how they are or are not related to one another (237). Logic can be divided into two major categories, deductive and inductive reasoning, both of which have their merits and limitations. They are both used to arrive at knowledge, which is justified, true, belief. Knowledge is derived with logic with varying degrees of accuracy through various methods. Logic can be understood as the relationship between concepts. As such, there are four major

Inductive reasoning, as described by Popkin and Stroll, “is concerned with inferences from the particular the general” and can (239). This type of argument relies on the probability of something being true rather than the absolute certainty of it. For example, one may accept the fact that they can never be confident that all ballpoints use blue ink because they cannot check every single ballpoint in existence. They would then check quite a few ballpoints until they can make a reasonable conclusion about the likelihood of all ballpoints using blue ink. If forty percent of a sample they take of ballpoints use blue ink, one would come to the conclusion that forty percent of ballpoints use ink. This is the form of reasoning employed by most scientists when they use data, or specific information, to draw conclusions about the natural world. Scientists will gather evidence, and use it to make statements that are likely to be true to some extent. This type of knowledge is not certain, but it is good enough for practical