Deductive reasoning, I don t understand it...

It doesn't say that "heavy use will lead to exceeding the standard", so the "moderate use will be reduced" is very smooth

As for A and not being able to push it out, A is a measure, and what should be done after exceeding the standard is a subjective judgment and has nothing to do with reasoning

Of course, if you're not convinced, you can think that standards are the highest limits that can be met, but there are inherent risks, and it's like asking people to cross the street carefully, but not being completely free of traffic accidents, and it's not feasible to raise the bar just because it's not feasible

I don't understand the question

Pay attention to the conclusion in the original question: the large or even excessive use of building materials in decoration will still lead to the accumulation of harmful substances exceeding the standard.

This conclusion itself can be seen as a sufficiently conditional hypothetical proposition. The antecedent is the large or even excessive use of building materials in the decoration.

The next thing is that it will still lead to the accumulation of hazardous substances exceeding the standard. Meaning:

As long as a large or even excessive use of building materials is used in the decoration, it will lead to the accumulation of harmful substances exceeding the standard. What can be derived from this? Of course it's d.

That is, the use of building materials in moderation (i.e. not in large quantities) can reduce harmful substances in indoor air. aIt has nothing to do with it.

To put it in logical terms, "if p, then q" can lead to "only non-p, not q".

In the question, it is said that a large number or even excessive use of building materials = the accumulation of harmful substances exceeds the standard.

Cumulative excess of hazardous substances = appropriate use of building materials.

Item D is exactly what the question means. "(Only) ......to be able to ......"Reduction of harmful substances in indoor air = appropriate use of building materials.

It is "a conclusion from a known fact called a premise," and a necessary "inference".If the premise is true, the conclusion must be true. This is different from retrospective reasoning and inductive reasoning.

Their premise can lead to a high probability conclusion, but it does not guarantee that the conclusion is true.

Deductive reasoning. It can also be defined as reasoning in which the conclusion is not more universal than the premise, or "the conclusion is as definitive as the premise".

Deductive reasoning is also known as syllogistic reasoning.

It is composed of two premises and a conclusion, the main premise is the general principle (law), that is, the abstract general, unified results; The minor premise refers to the individual object, which is the reasoning from the general to the individual, from which the reasoning is followed and then the conclusion is drawn. It is also known as reasoning from law to phenomenon. It is from the ordinary to the special and then to the individual.

Conditions for correct deductive reasoning: if the major and minor premises are correct, the conclusion is correct; If the major or minor premise is wrong, the conclusion is wrong.

Categories: Education, Science, >> Vocational Education.

Problem description: Be more detailed. Analysis:

It's very detailed. Pushing up is a macro stool that infers what is about to happen according to the existing signs, which is subjective.

Deduction is a purely objective situation, from one thing to another, for example: this Hidden Mind Brigade Building is derived from ancient Chinese architecture.

Inference and deduction differ in the following ways:

1.And history: Deductive argument predates reasoning, dating back to the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, while reasoning is largely derived from the inductive method of the English philosopher Francis Bacon.

2.Logic and pre-silver reasoning directions: Deduction is an inference from the general to the particular, such as the inference that sparrows can also fly from the fact that all birds can fly. Reasoning, on the other hand, is the inference of possible universal laws or conclusions from the observed individual facts.

3.Relationship between premises and conclusions: In deductive arguments, premises necessarily lead to conclusions.

If the premise is correct, then the conclusion is correct. In the inductive argument, the premise only supports the conclusion of the world situation to a certain extent, and does not ensure the correctness of the conclusion.

4.Example: A common example is Descartes' "I think, therefore I am". This conclusion ("I exist") is derived from two premises ("thinking represents being" and "I am thinking"). This is a typical deductive reasoning process.

To sum up, there are obvious differences between reasoning and deduction in terms of **, logic, the relationship between premises and conclusions, and examples.

If you want to push this finch to dig B, B is the basis of A, A is derived from B, is it a necessary condition for B to be A, there is no B without A, non-B is not A. A proposition is equivalent to his inverse proposition, which means a b, so that it is fully understood at once.

Deductive reasoning is a method of generalization to special reasoning. As opposed to "induction". The connection between the inferential premise and the conclusion is inevitable and is a kind of confirmatory reasoning.

To apply this method to study problems, we must first correctly grasp the general principles and principles that are the guiding ideology or basis; secondly, it is necessary to have a comprehensive understanding of the actual situation and particularity of the topic and problem to be studied; Only then can a conclusion be deduced that the general principles are used for a particular thing.

The forms of deductive reasoning include syllogism, hypothetical reasoning, and selective reasoning. In educational work, this method is inseparable from the design and conduct of education and teaching experiments according to certain scientific principles.

Among them, the main item in the conclusion is called the small term, which is represented by "s", such as "people's teacher" in the above example; The predicate in the conclusion is called the big term, which is denoted by "p", as in the example above, "should be respected"; The term common to the two premises is called the term in the group and is denoted by "m", as in the example above, "intellectual". In syllogisms, the premise that contains major items is called the major premise, as in the above example, "intellectuals should be respected"; The premise that contains a sub-item is called a minor premise, as in the above example, "the people's teacher is an intellectual".

Specific examples of deductive reasoning are as follows:1. The main premise: only when the fertilizer is sufficient, the vegetables will grow well.

Small premise: the vegetables in this field grow well.

Conclusion: So, the land is sufficiently fertilised.

2. Premise: Intellectuals should be respected.

Small premise: The people's teachers are all intellectuals.

Conclusion: People's teachers should be respected.

The so-called deductive reasoning is the process of starting from a general premise, through deduction, that is, "deduction", to arrive at specific statements or individual key nonsense. There are also several definitions of deductive reasoning:

1. Deductive reasoning is reasoning from the general to the particular. Manuscript block.

2. It is the reasoning of the conclusion implied by the premise.

3. It is reasoning that has a necessary connection between the premise and the conclusion.

4. Deductive reasoning is the reasoning of necessity that has sufficient conditions or sufficient necessary conditions between the premise and the conclusion.

The significance of the logical form of deductive reasoning to reason lies in the fact that it has an irreplaceable corrective effect on the rigor and consistency of human thinking. This is because deductive reasoning guarantees that reasoning is valid not on the basis of its content, but on its form. The most typical and important applications of deductive reasoning are usually found in logical and mathematical proofs.

Specific examples of deductive reasoning are:

1. The main premise: all gold pants can conduct electricity; Minor premise: Iron is a metal; Conclusion: So iron can conduct electricity.

2. The main premise: all natural numbers are integers; Minor premise: 4 is a natural number; Conclusion: So 4 is an integer.

3. Premise: The rectangle is a parallelogram; Minor premise: a triangle is not a parallelogram; Conclusion: So a triangle is not a rectangle.

4. The main premise: the shadow of the earth falling on the moon during the lunar eclipse is always round. Minor premise: Only spherical things can project a round shadow in any situation. Conclusion: So, this proves that the Earth is spherical and spherical.

5. The main premise: the sum of the three internal angles of any triangle is 180 degrees; Minor premise: A right triangle has a right angle with an angle of 90 degrees; Conclusion: So, the sum of the other two acute angles of a right triangle is 180 degrees - 90 degrees = 90 degrees.

6. Premise: If the last digit of a number is 0, then this number is divisible by 5; Minor premise: The last digit of this number is 0; Conclusion: So this number is divisible by 5.

7. Premise: If a figure is a square, then its four sides are equal; Minor premise: The four sides of this figure are not equal; Conclusion: It is not a square.