Abductive reasoning

About: Abductive reasoning is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1917 publications have been published within this topic receiving 44645 citations. The topic is also known as: abduction & abductive inference.

Axiomatic theories of intentional systems: methodology of theory construction

Abstract: This is the second article in a series relating to the development of axiomatic theories of intentional systems. This article presents a critique of methodologies for scientific discovery, and provides an alternative by which comprehensive, consistent, and complete theories in the social sciences can be developed. Further, it is argued that only axiomatic theories provide the means by which reliable evaluations and predictions can be obtained. A discussion of the hypothesis-driven methodologies of the social sciences is provided and why such methodologies do not result in scientific theories. Pursuant to Charles S. Peirce and subsequent confirmation by Elizabeth Steiner, theory development is the result of a reasoning process identified as retroduction. The hypothetico-deductive and grounded theory methodologies are considered and shown that they do not develop theory. It is argued that the reliance of social scientists on hypothesis-driven methodologies has compromised their ability to develop legitimate theory and has resulted in frustration by those who recognize that there is a serious problem in this industry concerning the development of social science theory.

Abductive Research Methods

Abstract: Three abductive research methods are described: (1) The multivariate statistical method of exploratory factor analysis is presented as an abductive method of theory generation that exploits an important principle of scientific inference known as the principle of the common cause. (2) The theory of explanatory coherence is an abductive method for evaluating the explanatory worth of competing theories. (3) Grounded theory method promotes the inductive generation of theories grounded in qualitative data. However, it can be plausibly reconstructed as an abductive account of scientific method. It is recommended that these methods should be part of the methodological armamentarium of educational and social science researchers.

Theory formation by abduction; initial results of a case study based on the chemical revolution

Abstract: Author(s): O'Rorke, Paul; Morris, Steven; Schulenburg, David | Abstract: Abduction is the process of constructing explanations. This chapter suggests that automated abduction is a key to advancing beyond the "routine theory revision" methods developed in early AI research towards automated reasoning systems capable of "world model revision" — dramatic changes in systems of beliefs such as occur in children's cognitive development and in scientific revolutions. The chapter describes a general approach to automating theory revision based upon computational methods for theory formation by abduction. The approach is based on the idea that, when an anomaly is encountered, the best course is often simply to suppress parts of the original theory thrown into question by the contradiction and to derive an explanation of the anomalous observation based on relatively solid, basic principles. This process of looking for explanations of unexpected new phenomena can lead by abductive inference to new hypotheses that can form crucial parts of a revised theory. As an illustration, the chapter shows how some of Lavoisier's key insights during the Chemical Revolution can be viewed as examples of theory formation by abduction.

Pleasure in Practical Reasoning

Abstract: The A. argues that practical reasoning is no worse off than theoretical reasoning, as far as the arbitrariness of its premises goes. Philosophers, unless they are skeptics, are generally not worried about theoretical reasoning being ungrounded. The A. will argue that practical reasoning can avail itself of an analog of belief formation underwritten by observational circumstances, so that practical reasoning has no more cause for embarrassment than theoretical reasoning

Creating Knowledge of Need: A Methodological Framework for its Abductive Inference

Abstract: !!!! Creating Knowledge of Need: A Methodological Framework for its Abductive Inference !! Introduction The fulfilment of humans needs is a physiological prerequisite for the individual's survival and prosperity [1]. Hence, the knowledge about needs is valuable assuming that knowing one’s need, rather than a certain satisfier to that need, enables us to find new/different ways of need satisfaction. Surprisingly, first empirical data suggest that people hardly talk about their needs and desires but rather about certain satisfiers meaning concrete objects or conditions when asked about what they need for their personal well-being. Furthermore, some philosophers claim that we cannot be aware of our needs directly but only of their satisfiers. [2] !! Research Question and Methods The question at hand is how researchers can look “behind” an observable satisfier (e.g. objects, state of affairs etc.) and identify the underlying need. So, the main concern is to make explicit what might be implicitly defining our acting. The aim of this empirical master thesis which is based on a project with the Austrian Federal Economic Chamber with about 150 untrained participants is to propose a replicable and consistent methodological framework for creating need knowledge which can be understood as explicit knowledge about one’s needs and desires. The project aims at finding a method for non-instantaneous settings meaning that data acquisition and analysis are sequential rather than iterative (no possibility for researchers to check back directly what the underlying need is). I am going to employ qualitative research methods in general and an abductive approach [3] in particular. Finding hypothetical explanations (needs) for the satisfiers observed (questionees report about their imagined future of a fulfilled professional life) should be supported by heterogeneous paradigmatic views on the data. Those views are based on different theories and approaches (e.g. theory of causality, generative listening [2]) and should be crystallized into sets of questions promoting the abductive process. Finally, to transform the bunch of hypothesis generated by researchers into verified knowledge about needs, a concluding feedback loop integrating the questionees in the knowledge creation process once again (communicative validation [3]) will be implemented. !! Structure After dealing with the theoretical backgrounds including the concept of need (and its relation to satisfier and desire), the epistemological foundations of need knowledge, theories on abductive reasoning, hermeneutics and communicative validation, I will evaluate approaches being potentially valuable for the abductive reasoning process and finally tailoring them to be usable for the research project (views on data). Additionally, I will discuss the role of researchers in and their effects on the knowledge creating process. !! References [1] G. Thomson, “Fundamental Needs,” in The Philosophy of Need, S. Reader, Ed. Cambridge: Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 2005. [2] S. K. McLeod, “Knowledge of Need,” International Journal of Philosophical Studies, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 211–230, Jun. 2011. [3] H. Asvoll, "Abduction, deduction and induction: can these concepts be used for an understanding of methodological processes in interpretative case studies?," International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, (ahead-of-print), pp. 1-19, 2013.