Dear all,
Maybe Sherlock Holmes, a fictional master of abduction, offers a way to bridge abduction and logic?
"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"
Abduction generates hypothesis, process of elimination demonstrates that hypothesis will generate outcome while no other cause will. Perhaps elimination here can be understood as: deduction will prove that the 'outcome' necessarily follows from 'cause', induction will prove that 'outcome' can only have come from 'cause'. Or do I mess up the terms?
Best Regards,
Lars
Conan Doyles, The Sign of the Four (1890), Chap. 6, p. 111
.........................................................................
LARS ALBINSSON
+46 (0) 70 592 70 45
[log in to unmask]
AFFILIATIONS:
MAESTRO MANAGEMENT AB
CALISTOGA SPRINGS RESEARCH INSTITUTE
UNIVERSITY OF BORÅS
LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY
.........................................................................
11 feb 2015 kl. 19:27 skrev Rolf Johansson <[log in to unmask]>:
Dear Nicolai,
Your example is from Charles Peirce (Collected papers 2.623). His wording
is:
-----------
Fact: these beans are white
Rule: all the beans from this bag are white
Case: these beans are from this bag
-----------
A good example of abductive reasoning is found in François Voltaire
(1747): Zadig, the third chapter
(I tried to insert a quote from Voltaire here, but a got a mail in return
telling me my mail had been blocked "Because it may contain unacceptable
language, or inappropriate material". You have to read Voltaire on your
own risk).
I recommend:
Umberto Eco & Thomas Sebeok (eds.): Dupin, Holmes, Peirce. The Sign of the
Three
As food for thought
Best
Rolf
-----------------
Rolf Johansson
Architect SAR/MSA, Dr.
Professor in Landscape Architecture Design Theory
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU)
Department of Urban and Rural Development
Unit of Landscape Architecture
--------------------
Den 2015-02-10 21.22 skrev Nicolai Steinø <[log in to unmask]>:
> Dear all,
>
> Some years back I did an urban design workshop with Thai and Danish BSc
> students at Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok. I used the example below
> to explain abduction, as opposed to deduction and induction. I find the
> example useful because it explains the difference by the order of a rule,
> a case and a result, respectively.
>
> Unfortunately I no longer remember where I got it from.
>
> Best,
>
> Nic
>
> --
>
> Research approach
>
> American pragmatist philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce
>
> Deduction (necessary inferences)
>
> Rule All thai people have dark hair
> Case All the people we have met are thai
> Result Therefore, all people we have met have dark hair
>
> Induction (probable inferences)
>
> Result All people we have met have dark hair
> Case All the people we have met are thai
> Rule Therefore, all thai people have dark hair
>
> Abduction (hypotheses)
>
> Rule All thai people have dark hair
> Result All people we have met have dark hair
> Case Therefore, all the people we have met are thai
>
> Pros and cons of abduction
>
> Does not rely on strong theory building
> Does not rely on large samples
> Requires a capacity for making 'hunches'
> The validity of the conclusion relies on the quality of the hunch
>
>
>
> NICOLAI STEINØ
> Associate Professor, PhD, GDBA
>
> AALBORG UNIVERSITY
> DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE, DESIGN and MEDIA TECHNOLOGY
> Rendsborggade 14 · DK - 9000 AALBORG
>
> Office: 6.330a
> Office hours: By appointment only
>
> TEL: (+45) 99 40 71 36
> CELL: (+45) 28 76 06 98
>
> eMail:
> [log in to unmask]<applewebdata://D7BC17ED-62C9-4655-92DC-366322E4E887/s
> [log in to unmask]>
> Staff profile: http://personprofil.aau.dk/Profil/107588?languageId=1
> Homepage: http://homes.create.aau.dk/steino
> Blog: http://steino.wordpress.com
> Academia:
> http://aalborg.academia.edu/NicolaiSteinø<http://aalborg.academia.edu/Nico
> laiStein%C3%B8>
>
>
>
> Den 10/02/2015 kl. 20.29 skrev Ken Friedman
> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>:
>
> Dear Terry and all,
>
> Abduction is essentially a mode of forming hypotheses. Technically,
> abduction is “inference to best explanation.” This entails many issues —
> with room for debate. The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy offers an
> excellent article on abduction, with a good reference list and sources of
> additional information:
>
> http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/abduction/
>
> While C. S. Peirce wrote at length on abduction, he was not the first to
> do so earlier or since. The phenomenon has long been described in
> different ways. The crucial issue is that abduction is a logic of
> discovery. Abductive inference is not a logic of proof — one requires
> other means to determine the validity or facticity of abductive inference.
>
> This is why abduction is one method of hypothesis formation. Generating
> hypotheses is a necessary step in discovery, but for everything human
> beings have learned, there have been more false or incorrect hypotheses
> than true or correct hypotheses.
>
> In recent articles and reports, I have seen the incorrect assertion that
> scientific research makes use of induction and deduction while design
> research makes use of abduction. This is incorrect. Scientists use
> abduction to form hypotheses, and researchers in all fields require
> induction and deduction — as well as experiment and observation — to
> choose among hypotheses.
>
> Peirce and others treat abduction as a way of knowing, but not as a way
> of validating the knowledge. This requires other methods.
>
> For those who wish to read further, I have a DropBox collection of
> articles on abduction in PDF format. If you wish access to the
> collection, send me an off-list email and I will be happy to grant access
> to the collection.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ken
>
> Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The
> Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Elsevier in
> Cooperation with Tongji University Press | Launching in 2015
>
> Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and
> Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University
> Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne
> University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
>
> Email [log in to unmask] | Academia
> http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman | D&I http://tjdi.tongji.edu.cn
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
> Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|