Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Inductive Reasoning00:59

Inductive Reasoning

61.1K
Inductive reasoning is a form of logical thinking that uses related observations to arrive at a general conclusion. It is uncertain and operates in degrees to which the conclusions are credible. As such, inductive arguments can be weak or strong, rather than valid or invalid, and conclusions can be used to formulate testable, falsifiable hypotheses.
Inductive reasoning is common in descriptive science. A life scientist makes observations and records them. This data can be qualitative or...
61.1K
Deductive Reasoning01:16

Deductive Reasoning

56.7K
Deductive reasoning, or deduction, is the type of logic used in hypothesis-based science. In deductive reasoning, the pattern of thinking moves in the opposite direction as compared to inductive reasoning, which means that it uses a general principle or law to predict specific results. From those general principles, a scientist can deduce and predict the specific results that would be valid as long as the general principles are valid.
For example, a researcher can deduce specific predictions...
56.7K
Routes of Persuasion02:20

Routes of Persuasion

64.4K
Persuasion is the process of changing our attitude toward something based on some kind of communication. Much of the persuasion we experience comes from outside forces. How do people convince others to change their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors? What communications do you receive that attempt to persuade you to change your attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors?
64.4K
Reasoning01:30

Reasoning

120
Reasoning is the action of thinking about something in a logical, sensible way. It is integral to problem-solving, decision-making, and critical thinking. Reasoning can be inductive or deductive. Reasoning involves transforming information into conclusions, which is essential for problem-solving, decision-making, and critical thinking.
Inductive reasoning involves deriving generalizations from specific observations. This type of reasoning helps form beliefs about the world. For example,...
120
Revisionist Views of Adolescent and Adult Cognition01:24

Revisionist Views of Adolescent and Adult Cognition

85
A revisionist approach to Jean Piaget's theory of cognitive development has brought new insights that challenge and reinterpret his established ideas. Piaget proposed that the formal operational stage, emerging in adolescence, represents the culmination of cognitive maturity. During this stage, individuals are said to develop abstract thinking, engage in systematic problem-solving, and show a form of egocentrism, believing others are as preoccupied with their behavior as they are...
85
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

6.5K
The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the...
6.5K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Critical Contextual Empiricism for Busy People: Scientific Argumentation as Epistemic Exchange.

Topoi : an international review of philosophy·2025
Same author

Public engagement and argumentation in science.

European journal for philosophy of science·2022
Same author

Numerosities are not ersatz numbers.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2021
Same author

Who's Afraid of Adversariality? Conflict and Cooperation in Argumentation.

Topoi : an international review of philosophy·2021
Same journal

Bootstrapping and Persuasive Argumentation.

Argumentation·2024
Same journal

The Fallacy of Misplaced Presumption.

Argumentation·2023
Same journal

Committing Fallacies and the Appearance Condition.

Argumentation·2023
Same journal

Twitter Activists' Argumentation Through Subdiscussions: Theory, Method and Illustration of the Controversy Surrounding Sustainable Fashion.

Argumentation·2022
Same journal

Bothsiderism.

Argumentation·2022
Same journal

Annotating Argument Schemes.

Argumentation·2021
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Aug 20, 2025

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language
09:27

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language

Published on: October 13, 2018

10.1K

Two Types of Refutation in Philosophical Argumentation.

Catarina Dutilh Novaes1,2

  • 1Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Argumentation
|November 18, 2022
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Philosophical refutation involves demonstrating errors in claims or theories. Socratic dialectic effectively questions assumptions, while counterexamples risk overly narrow disputes, potentially distancing philosophy from human experience.

Keywords:
AristotleCounterexamplesElenchusGettier problemLakatosSocrates

More Related Videos

The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
05:48

The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients

Published on: June 12, 2020

5.8K
The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling
06:51

The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling

Published on: April 6, 2018

8.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Aug 20, 2025

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language
09:27

Using Eye Movements Recorded in the Visual World Paradigm to Explore the Online Processing of Spoken Language

Published on: October 13, 2018

10.1K
The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
05:48

The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients

Published on: June 12, 2020

5.8K
The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling
06:51

The Modified Temptation Resistance Task: A Paradigm to Elicit Children's Strategic Lie-telling

Published on: April 6, 2018

8.5K

Area of Science:

  • Philosophy
  • Logic
  • Epistemology

Background:

  • Philosophical inquiry relies on refutation to challenge claims, persons, or theories.
  • Two key methods of refutation are ancient Greek dialectic (elenchus) and modern counterexample-based approaches.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To highlight the significance of refutation practices in philosophical inquiry.
  • To contrast Socratic elenchus with the counterexample method.
  • To discuss Imre Lakatos' insights on proofs and refutations.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of Socratic dialogues and Aristotelian logic for elenchus.
  • Examination of counterexample techniques in 20th-century analytic philosophy, including the Gettier problem.
  • Discussion of Lakatos' methodology of proofs and refutations.

Main Results:

  • Socratic dialectic excels at questioning the obvious and fostering self-reflection on beliefs.
  • Counterexample methods can lead to overly specialized debates detached from human experience.
  • Lakatos' work provides a dynamic view of argument, refutation, and counterexample interplay.

Conclusions:

  • Dialectic, especially the Socratic variant, is well-suited for uncovering inconsistencies and questioning assumptions.
  • Over-reliance on counterexamples may alienate philosophical discourse from lived human experiences.
  • A judicious use of 'monster-barring' (rejecting artificial counterexamples) is valuable for robust philosophical argumentation.