How to Separate the Results and Discussion - Assignment Example

Answer Sheet for Week 4 Writing Assignment Separating reasons from conclusions Reason 2 Conclusion 3 Reason 4 Conclusion 5 Reason 6 Conclusion7Reason8Conclusion9Conclusion10Reason11Conclusion12Conclusion Fallacies: 1This fallacy is true.2This fallacy is false. Effectiveness stems from an appeal to lead the attention to another argument.3This fallacy is false. Two wrongs never make a right.4This fallacy is true.5Appeal to fear.6Personal attack.7Bandwagon. 8Personal attack.9NF10Appeal to pity.

11NF12Poisoning the well.13Appeal to false authority. 14Red herring. 15NF16Circular reasoning.17Pointing to another wrong.18NF19NF20Poisoning the well.21Circular reasoning.22Circular reasoning.23Poisoning the well.24Poisoning the well. 25NFInductive Reasoning: 1Inductive reasoning is a logical process in which premises, not one but several all either found or believed true most of the times, combined to come up with a specific conclusion. 2Scientists use inductive reasoning to formulate theories.

This happens because a hypothesis that is based on inductive reasoning lead to a more careful study of the situation at hand. Inductive reasoning has been used to come up with qualitative research. This is so because it allows us to form ideas about groups or even things in the real life. The research ends up being appreciated worldwide. Geometry is another situation where inductive reasoning is applied. It helps us to organize what we observe into succinct geometric hypotheses that can be proved using other methods that are reliable.

Inductive reasoning has been used to settle problems basing on either truth or false. The weak arguments are always uncogent. The only time that they are rendered cogent is when the premises that they are based upon are true. 3Observation- this involves collecting of facts without biasness. Analysis- this is whereby one classifies the facts while identifying patterns of regularity.Interference- after getting the patterns infers generalization about the relations between the facts and findings.

Confirmation- the interference is tested through further observation. Conclusion- after using further observation draws a conclusion. 4The rules of inductive reasoning can help us improve our causal reasoning for example when we talk of smoking causes cancer. It leaves it not concluded since not all people for instance get cancer.5The conclusion needs not to be totally certain because a general principle logically cannot be assumed to be true.6Hypothesis is an explanation for a set of observations.

Example of this is ‘if you take coffee before retiring to bed, you are more likely to take longer hours to fall asleep.7Basic rules for statistical sampling include:There must be relevance in statistical analysis. The researcher should also guard against predisposition of the analytic result by investigators. Always remain current in dynamically evolving statistical methodology. The subject matter expertise and adequate statistical is both applied to any planned study. Ensure that methodologies that are used are suitable to the data and to obtaining results that are valid.

8The statistics given are unreliable because each study should be based on a very competent understanding of the issues in the subject matter and also the statistical protocol that are defined clearly but then this discussion did not meet that. The methods used were ancient hence the data received cannot be proved valid. The statistical methodology of yesterday cannot be accepted today. The criterion of getting expertise in statistics and the subject matter if not met then it means that the results are not valid.

I rate the statistics given as unreliable. ReferencesFeeney, A., & Heit, E. (2007). Inductive reasoning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.