Reasoning
|
Reasoning | |
|---|---|
|
| |
| Type | Cognitive and epistemic process |
| Field | Epistemology; Logic; Philosophy of mind |
| Core idea | Process of forming, evaluating, and revising beliefs or conclusions based on relations between propositions |
| Assumptions | Beliefs can be connected by justificatory relations; reasoning processes can be evaluated for correctness or adequacy |
| Status | Foundational concept |
| Related | Inference; Logic; Rationality; Argument |
Reasoning is the process by which agents form, evaluate, and revise beliefs, judgments, or conclusions on the basis of relations between propositions. It encompasses both formal procedures, such as logical deduction, and informal cognitive processes used in everyday thought and decision-making.
Reasoning is central to epistemology, logic, and the philosophy of mind, where it is examined both as a normative activity governed by standards and as a psychological process carried out by human and artificial agents.
Core idea
At its core, reasoning involves relating propositions in ways that support or undermine conclusions. To reason is not merely to have beliefs, but to hold them in patterns that permit justification, criticism, and revision.
Reasoning can be evaluated in terms of validity, coherence, relevance, or effectiveness, depending on context and purpose.
Reasoning and inference
Reasoning is closely related to inference, but the two are not identical. Inference concerns the justificatory relation between premises and conclusions, whereas reasoning refers to the process by which agents arrive at or assess those relations.
An inference may be valid even if the reasoning that produced it was flawed, and conversely, careful reasoning may lead to uncertain conclusions when evidence is limited.
Forms of reasoning
Several broad forms of reasoning are commonly distinguished:
- Deductive reasoning — reasoning in which conclusions follow necessarily from premises.
- Inductive reasoning — reasoning that supports conclusions probabilistically based on patterns or evidence.
- Abductive reasoning — reasoning that selects hypotheses as plausible explanations of observed facts.
These forms differ in logical strength and in the degree of certainty they can provide.
Reasoning and logic
Formal logic provides systems for evaluating certain kinds of reasoning, particularly deductive reasoning. Logical analysis specifies when conclusions follow from premises independently of content.
However, much real-world reasoning falls outside the scope of formal logic, involving uncertainty, context sensitivity, and incomplete information.
Reasoning and rationality
Reasoning is often evaluated with respect to rationality. Rational reasoning is typically understood as reasoning that conforms to appropriate norms, such as logical consistency, probabilistic coherence, or responsiveness to evidence.
Disagreement arises over whether rationality is a single standard or varies by domain, goal, or context.
Psychological aspects
From a psychological perspective, reasoning is studied as a cognitive process subject to limitations, biases, and heuristics. Empirical research shows that human reasoning often deviates from idealized logical or probabilistic norms.
These findings raise questions about the relationship between normative standards and actual cognitive performance.
Reasoning in science
Scientific inquiry relies on reasoning to connect data, models, and theories. Reasoning guides experimental design, interpretation of results, and theory choice.
Problems such as underdetermination highlight cases where reasoning alone cannot uniquely determine conclusions from available evidence.
Artificial reasoning
In artificial systems, reasoning is implemented through algorithms and formal procedures. These systems may perform logical inference, probabilistic reasoning, or heuristic search.
Debates continue over whether artificial reasoning captures the same normative and semantic properties as human reasoning.
Limits and error
Reasoning can fail due to invalid logical steps, unjustified assumptions, or misinterpretation of evidence. Even well-structured reasoning may lead to false conclusions when premises are false or incomplete.
Recognizing these limits is essential for evaluating arguments and claims.
Status
Reasoning is a foundational concept rather than a settled theory. Its analysis clarifies how beliefs are formed and justified, and where cognitive or methodological limits constrain reliable conclusion-drawing.