Mathematical Reasoning: Adults' Ability to Make the Inductive-Deductive Distinction

In this study, I examined adults' ability to distinguish necessary deductive and indeterminate inductive forms of argument in mathematics. Only 30% of a sample of college students distinguished deductive and inductive forms of argument and experienced deductively derived conclusions as necessary and inductively derived conclusions as uncertain. Forty percent failed to distinguish deductive and inductive forms and experienced inductively derived and deductively derived conclusions as necessary. Thirty percent distinguished deductive and inductive arguments but experienced deductively derived and inductively derived conclusions as uncertain. As observed in other reasoning domains, the introduction of personal beliefs or knowledge about the argument content appeared to affect adult reasoners' application of knowledge about forms of argument and judgments of necessity. The results suggest the following conclusions. Adults' experience of the conclusions from mathematical inductive and deductive arguments as provisional conclusions or necessary conclusions depends on a complex coordination involving ability to attend to abstract premise-conclusion relations and beliefs about the nature of mathematical objects and regularities. Thus, two major achievements are involved, explaining the low numbers able to judge necessity in mathematics.

[1]  Lauren B. Resnick,et al.  From Protoquantities to Operators: building mathematical competence on a Foundation of Everyday Knowledge , 1991 .

[2]  P. Pollard,et al.  On the conflict between logic and belief in syllogistic reasoning , 1983, Memory & cognition.

[3]  H. Markovits,et al.  Reasoning with contrary-to-fact propositions. , 1989, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[4]  I. Lakatos,et al.  Proofs and Refutations: Frontmatter , 1976 .

[5]  C. Hirsch Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics , 1988 .

[6]  C. Hempel On the Nature of Mathematical Truth , 1945 .

[7]  Alan H. Schoenfeld,et al.  Explorations of Students' Mathematical Beliefs and Behavior. , 1989 .

[8]  V. Sloutsky,et al.  Understanding of logical necessity: developmental antecedents and cognitive consequences. , 1998, Child development.

[9]  Willis F. Overton,et al.  Reasoning about certainty and uncertainty in concrete, causal, and propositional contexts. , 1986 .

[10]  A. Su,et al.  The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics , 1932, The Mathematical Gazette.

[11]  Willis F. Overton,et al.  Competence and procedures: Constraints on the development of logical reasoning. , 1990 .

[12]  Knowing when you don't know: Developmental and situational considerations. , 1988 .

[13]  E. R. Williams An investigation of senior high school students understanding of the nature of mathematical proof , 1979 .

[14]  L. Komatsu,et al.  Children's reasoning about social, physical, and logical regularities: a look at two worlds. , 1986, Child development.

[15]  Hilary Putnam,et al.  Mathematics without Foundations , 1967 .

[16]  Shawn L. Ward,et al.  Semantic Familiarity, Relevance, and the Development of Deductive Reasoning , 1990 .

[17]  William G. Faris Philosophy of Mathematics : An Introduction to the World of Proofs and Pictures , 2000 .

[18]  David Moshman,et al.  The development of metalogical understanding , 1996 .

[19]  D. Chazan High school geometry students' justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof , 1993 .

[20]  Imre Lakatos,et al.  On the Uses of Rigorous Proof. (Book Reviews: Proofs and Refutations. The Logic of Mathematical Discovery) , 1977 .

[21]  Bridget A. Franks,et al.  Development of the Concept of Inferential Validity. , 1986 .

[22]  H. Markovits,et al.  The belief-bias effect in reasoning: The development and activation of competence , 1992 .

[23]  G. Harel,et al.  PROOF FRAMES OF PRESERVICE ELEMENTARY TEACHERS , 1989 .

[24]  Hyman Bass,et al.  Chapter VII: Making Believe: The Collective Construction of Public Mathematical Knowledge in the Elementary Classroom , 2000, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[25]  C. Kielkopf What is Mathematics Really , 2003 .

[26]  Certainty and Necessity in the Understanding of Piagetian Concepts. , 1986 .

[27]  Philip Kitcher,et al.  The Nature of Mathematical Knowledge. , 1985 .

[28]  Penelope L. Peterson,et al.  Chapter 2: Alternative Perspectives on Knowing Mathematics in Elementary Schools , 1990 .

[29]  Imre Lakatos,et al.  A Renaissance of Empiricism in the Recent Philosophy of Mathematics* , 1976, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science.

[30]  Keith Porteous What do children really believe? , 1990 .

[31]  Daniel N. Osherson,et al.  Language and the ability to evaluate contradictions and tautologies , 1975, Cognition.