scholarly journals What styles of reasoning are important in primary English?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michaela Oliver
Keyword(s):  
Styles Of Reasoning

scholarly journals The Current Status of Ethnobiology in Ecuador

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 206-213
Author(s):  
Tania Ivanova Gonzalez-Rivadeneira ◽  
Radamés Villagómez-Resendiz ◽  
Alessio Barili
Keyword(s):  
Research Program ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Research Production ◽  
Nature And Culture ◽  
Online Databases ◽  
Styles Of Reasoning

This article gives an account of the current status of ethnobiology in Ecuador. Our goal is a generalized diagnosis of Latin America’s ethnobiological research production, which portrays Ecuadorian ethnobiology as practically non-existent. We perform an updated search of online databases, using a range of keywords, to show that elements of an ethnobiological research program are indeed present in Ecuadorian scholarship. While ethnobotany is the most developed sub-discipline of ethnobiology in Ecuador, there is also research on ethnomedicine, ethnozoology, and, to a lesser extent, ethnomycology. The development of these sub-disciplines promotes further ethnobiological scholarship in Ecuador. Beyond these sub-disciplines, ethnobiology is interwoven with contemporary anthropological accounts that emphasize the relationships between nature and culture and shine a light on the epistemic plurality of ethnobiology. If ethnobiology in Ecuador is distinguished by an epistemic plurality—understood through these different styles of reasoning—then it can be characterized without being confined to sub-disciplines with the ethno- prefix.

Case-Based, Model-Based, and Explanation-Based Styles of Reasoning in Foreign Policy

1994 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald A. Sylvan ◽  
Thomas M. Ostrom ◽  
Katherine Gannon
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Model Based ◽  
Case Based ◽  
Styles Of Reasoning

Choosing a reasoning style for knowledge based system: lessons from supporting a help desk

1993 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 201-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew M. Dearden ◽  
Derek G. Bridge
Keyword(s):  
Structure And Function ◽  
Domain Model ◽  
Explicit Model ◽  
Help Desk ◽  
Knowledge Based ◽  
Deep Model ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
Reasoning Style ◽  
And Function ◽  
Styles Of Reasoning

AbstractIn this paper, we present two broad styles of KBS reasoner: those based primarily on some general, explicit model of the knowledge of the domain (whether that model be expressed by heuristic rules or by a deep model of structure and function), which we term domain model-based reasoners; and those based primarily on a set of examples of events in the domain, which we term example-based reasoners (EBR), of which case-based reasoners are a subset. The aim of this paper is to guide developers in considering the trade-offs between these different styles of reasoning. We believe that this cannot be done in general, but may be possible for specific domains. Thus, the paper provides an example analysis of the usefulness of these reasoning styles. We assess the suitability of these styles against a series of requirements which we have identified that KBSs must fulfil if they are to support help desk operations. We conclude that EBR systems are more likely to meet those requirements (the analysis draws on our earlier work in Bridge & Dearden, 1992).

From Pattern Recognition to Economic Disequilibrium

2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (S1) ◽  
pp. 180-203
Author(s):  
Olessia Kirtchik
Keyword(s):  
Pattern Recognition ◽  
Information Processing ◽  
Autonomous Agents ◽  
Soviet Economy ◽  
Optimal Planning ◽  
Analytic Framework ◽  
Mathematical Economics ◽  
Third Way ◽  
Fixed Price ◽  
Styles Of Reasoning

This article is focused on the economic works of the Soviet machinelearning pioneer Emmanuil Braverman, who published, during the 1970s, a series of papers introducing disequilibrium fixed-price models of the Soviet economy. This highly original theory, developed independently from the Western analyses of disequilibria, proposed rationing mechanisms capable, under some conditions, of bringing a system to the state of equilibrium. However, in a fixed-price economy, equilibria are not necessarily optimal or effective; therefore specific observational and analytic procedures aiming at bringing a system to a better state had to be invented. Braverman interpreted this analytic framework as a “qualitative system of control” of the Soviet economy representing a sort of a third-way solution between neoclassical models of spontaneous coordination of autonomous agents and theories of optimal planning. This innovative approach, very different from the styles of reasoning in mathematical economics of his time, was grounded in his work on pattern recognition and informed by a cybernetic vision of control as information processing and communication in complex systems.

scholarly journals Different knowledge, different styles of reasoning: a challenge for guideline development

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 87-91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sietse Wieringa ◽  
Dunja Dreesens ◽  
Frode Forland ◽  
Carel Hulshof ◽  
Sue Lukersmith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Guideline Development ◽  
Styles Of Reasoning

scholarly journals Reasons, Rationalities, and Procreative Beneficence: Need Häyry Stand Politely By While Savulescu and Herissone-Kelly Disagree?

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 258-267 ◽  
Author(s):  
PETER HERISSONE-KELLY
Keyword(s):  
Rational Deliberation ◽  
Procreative Beneficence ◽  
Moral Problems ◽  
Styles Of Reasoning ◽  
The Way

The claim that the answers we give to many of the central questions in genethics will depend crucially upon the particular rationality we adopt in addressing them is central to Matti Häyry’s thorough and admirably fair-minded book, Rationality and the Genetic Challenge. That claim implies, of course, that there exists a plurality of rationalities, or discrete styles of reasoning, that can be deployed when considering concrete moral problems. This, indeed, is Häyry’s position. Although he believes that there are certain features definitive of any type of thinking that can accurately be labeled rational, he maintains that nothing about that set of features compels us to conclude that there is a single rationality. What is more, and significantly for the way in which Häyry’s book develops, there is no Archimedean point from which we are licensed to pronounce one flavor of rational deliberation to be intrinsically superior to any other or to be justified to the exclusion of all others. To this belief that “there are many divergent rationalities, all of which can be simultaneously valid,” we can perhaps give the name “the Doctrine of the Plurality of Rationalities” or, for short, “DPR.”

scholarly journals Feminism, Argumentation and Coalescence

1994 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Gilbert
Keyword(s):  
Argumentation Theory ◽  
Significant Part ◽  
Logical Model ◽  
Carol Gilligan ◽  
Styles Of Reasoning

This essay begins with a critique of the Critical-Logical model dominant in contemporary argumentation theory. The concerns raised stem primarily from considerations brought by several feminist thinkers including Carol Gilligan, Karen Warren, Deborah Tannen and, most especially, Andrea Nye. It is argued that, in light of these considerations, and concerns of essentialism or non-essentialism notwithstanding, that the Critical-Logical model is liable to dis-enfranchise a significant part of the population with regard to modes and styles of reasoning. The solution is found in coalescent reasoning, an approach to argumentation that focuses on finding agreement rather than emphasizing disagreement and criticism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document