Adaptive expertise - Revision history

en>MWinAL: Added definitions of routine and adaptive expertise from Hatano and Inagaki; added conditions for developing adaptive expertise from Hatano and Inagaki; added additional suggestion from Hatano and Oura on promoting adaptive expertise in schools

2014-05-01T02:40:17Z

Added definitions of routine and adaptive expertise from Hatano and Inagaki; added conditions for developing adaptive expertise from Hatano and Inagaki; added additional suggestion from Hatano and Oura on promoting adaptive expertise in schools

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:40, 1 May 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~{{Merge to\|Hasty generalization\|date=November 2010}}~~		Hi there. My name is Garland although it is not the name on my beginning certificate. One of his preferred hobbies is taking part in crochet but he hasn't made a dime with it. Years ago we moved to Kansas. His working day occupation is a monetary officer but he plans on altering it.<br><br>Also visit my web-site; [http://Www.evil-Esports.de/cs/index.php?mod=users&action=view&id=5958 extended auto warranty]
	~~{{Refimprove\|date=November 2006}}~~

	'''Proof by example''' (also known as '''inappropriate generalization''') is a [[Informal fallacy\|logical fallacy]] whereby one or more examples are claimed as "proof" for a more general statement.<ref>http://www.auburn.edu/~marchjl/fallacies.htm</ref>

	~~This fallacy has the following structure, and [[argument form]]:~~

	~~Structure:~~
	~~:I know that X is such~~.
	~~:Therefore, anything related to X~~ is ~~also such.~~

	~~[[Argument form]]:~~
	~~:I know that x, which~~ is ~~a member of group X, has~~ the ~~property P~~.
	~~:Therefore, all other elements~~ of ~~X have the property P.~~

	~~The following example demonstrates why this~~ is ~~a logical fallacy:~~
	~~: I've seen a person shoot someone dead.~~
	~~: Therefore, all people are murderers.~~

	~~The flaw~~ in ~~this argument is very evident,~~ but ~~arguments of the same form can sometimes seem somewhat convincing, as in the following example:~~

	:I'~~ve seen Gypsies steal~~. ~~So, Gypsies must be thieves.~~

	~~==When valid==~~
	~~However, argument by example is valid when it leads from a singular premise~~ to ~~an ''existential'' conclusion. For example:~~

	~~:Socrates is wise~~.
	~~:Therefore, someone~~ is ~~wise.~~
	~~(or)~~
	~~:I've seen~~ a ~~person steal~~.
	~~:Therefore, people can steal.~~

	This is an informal version of the logical rule known as [[List_of_rules_of_inference#Rules_of_classical_predicate_calculus\|existential introduction]] (also known as ''particularisation'' or ''existential generalization'').

	~~Formally~~

	~~;Existential Introduction:~~
	: <~~math~~>~~\underline{\varphi(\beta / \alpha)}\,\!~~<~~/math~~>
	: ~~<math>\exists \alpha\, \varphi\,\!<~~/~~math>~~

	~~==See also==~~
	*[[Modus ponens]]
	*[[Affirming the consequent]]
	*[[Inductive reasoning]]
	*[[Bayesian probability]]
	*[[Proof by construction]]
	*[[Anecdotal evidence]]
	*[[Counterexample]]

	==~~References~~==
	~~<references/>~~

	~~{{Formal Fallacy}}~~

	~~{{DEFAULTSORT:Proof By Example}}~~
	~~[[Category:Quantificational fallacies]~~]

en>Kt4ua: Created "Developing Adaptive Expertise in the Classroom" section

2013-04-18T01:50:00Z

Created "Developing Adaptive Expertise in the Classroom" section

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:50, 18 April 2013
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~Hello~~, ~~my title~~ is ~~Felicidad but~~ I ~~don~~'~~t like when~~ people ~~use my full title~~. ~~Her spouse and her chose to reside~~ in ~~Delaware~~ but ~~she requirements~~ to ~~move because of her family~~. ~~Interviewing~~ is ~~what she does in her working day job but soon her husband and her will begin their own business~~. ~~Climbing~~ is ~~what love performing~~.<br><br>~~Here is my blog post [http~~://~~Alles-Herunterladen.de/auto-repair-tips-youll-wish-youd-read-sooner/ auto warranty~~]		{{Merge to\|Hasty generalization\|date=November 2010}}
			{{Refimprove\|date=November 2006}}

			'''Proof by example''' (also known as '''inappropriate generalization''') is a [[Informal fallacy\|logical fallacy]] whereby one or more examples are claimed as "proof" for a more general statement.<ref>http://www.auburn.edu/~marchjl/fallacies.htm</ref>

			This fallacy has the following structure, and [[argument form]]:

			Structure:
			:I know that X is such.
			:Therefore, anything related to X is also such.

			[[Argument form]]:
			:I know that x, which is a member of group X, has the property P.
			:Therefore, all other elements of X have the property P.

			The following example demonstrates why this is a logical fallacy:
			: I've seen a person shoot someone dead.
			: Therefore, all people are murderers.

			The flaw in this argument is very evident, but arguments of the same form can sometimes seem somewhat convincing, as in the following example:

			:I've seen Gypsies steal. So, Gypsies must be thieves.

			==When valid==
			However, argument by example is valid when it leads from a singular premise to an ''existential'' conclusion. For example:

			:Socrates is wise.
			:Therefore, someone is wise.
			(or)
			:I've seen a person steal.
			:Therefore, people can steal.

			This is an informal version of the logical rule known as [[List_of_rules_of_inference#Rules_of_classical_predicate_calculus\|existential introduction]] (also known as ''particularisation'' or ''existential generalization'').

			Formally

			;Existential Introduction:
			: <math>\underline{\varphi(\beta / \alpha)}\,\!</math>
			: <math>\exists \alpha\, \varphi\,\!</math>

			==See also==
			*[[Modus ponens]]
			*[[Affirming the consequent]]
			*[[Inductive reasoning]]
			*[[Bayesian probability]]
			*[[Proof by construction]]
			*[[Anecdotal evidence]]
			*[[Counterexample]]

			==References==
			<references/>

			{{Formal Fallacy}}

			{{DEFAULTSORT:Proof By Example}}
			[[Category:Quantificational fallacies]]

en>Yobot: WP:CHECKWIKI error 61 fixes + general fixes using AWB (8032)

2012-03-20T22:41:56Z

WP:CHECKWIKI error 61 fixes + general fixes using AWB (8032)

New page

Hello, my title is Felicidad but I don't like when people use my full title. Her spouse and her chose to reside in Delaware but she requirements to move because of her family. Interviewing is what she does in her working day job but soon her husband and her will begin their own business. Climbing is what love performing.<br><br>Here is my blog post [http://Alles-Herunterladen.de/auto-repair-tips-youll-wish-youd-read-sooner/ auto warranty]