Monday, November 8, 2010
Sign Reasoning
After going through all the list of reasoning, i find that sign reasoning is the hardest to understand for me because i did not understand the definition which is argument by sign asserts that two or more things are so closely related that the presence or absence of the other. I found this confusing because i did not know what this meant until i saw the example: Fingerprints are signs of being discrete, just as a footprint is an indication that someone has walked by recently. Now the easiest way to understand sign reasoning is look for something big and have something small to notice it by. For example, in the website, it gave an example of when you see smoke, it is a sign that there is a fire near. Reasoning is a good way to start a conversation as well as retaliate in an argument because it allows you to use different examples to get you point across.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Wow, we have the same problem. I really didn’t get what sign of reasoning was trying to say. I kept looking at the examples over and over until I kind of got it. It is still sort of confusing, but by reading your blog, I think that I got a better understanding of it. I tried to look for more information on sign of reasoning, but I couldn’t really find anything. Online, one of the websites says, “an argument by sign asserts that two or more things are so closely related that the presence or absence of one indicates the presence or absence of the other”. I understood it a little. Maybe I just need more information and ill be able to understand reasoning by signs. Good post by the way.
ReplyDeleteNice job on breaking down sign reasoning! At first, when I read the definition, I felt a bit puzzled too. Thank goodness there was an example provided that made it so much clearer to understand its concept. If only there was a better way to define it for us to understand it easier. You seem to have solved the issue by mentioning that the "easiest way to understand sign reasoning is to look for something big and have something small to notice it by". In the website's example about smoke and fire, it wouldn't be considered as a good argument because seeing smoke does not always mean that there's a fire.
ReplyDeleteLayers,
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting this blog. I did not understand this concept either and after reading your bog, I was able to confidently explain the concept to myself and anyone else who would have been confused. Your example was really helpful as well. It made everything much clearer and easier to understand because it went along with your definition. Before reading your blog, I tried looking up the definition online by using other resources, but they were not as helpful as your post. Your post made me realize that it is important to ask others for help and not just try to do everything on your own. Thanks!
hi,
ReplyDeletei also found sign reasoning a bit difficult to understand but criteria reasoning really stumped me. from your blog, i got a better description of what sign reasoning is. basically, you're saying that one thing can make you assume the most logical thing, like if there's smoke, then there's a fire. i like how you said that analogies can be used as a power of persuasion. i have experienced that myself because i've used that as a defense mechanism, you could say. "finding something big by noticing something small" is a good way to explain smoke and a fire. overall, i liked your blog.
Hey I am glad that I was not the only person in class who felt this. In fact, a lot of other students had troubles understanding this reasoning. when I first read the definition of it, I had absolutely no clue as too what was being explained. The part of your blog where you state that the easiest way to comprehend sign reasoning is to basically have something small to compare it to. This made the most sense to me. Prior to reading your blog, I was lost. Your post make me realize I was not alone in the class, and that everyone needed better clarification.
ReplyDelete