The incompetence of the King County Elections division keeps growing, one ballot at a time. Last week they found 93 previously uncounted ballots. Just yesterday, one more surfaced.
I am going to go ahead and make the obvious prediction: Inductive reasoning* says that there will be more, oh yes, there will be more.
*I was corrected by Banks when I originally said this was deductive rather than inductive reasoning. I have a knack for mixing those details up. My apologies to my philospher friend.
About Me
- Matt Cole
- Matt Cole currently works in the marketing and public relations industry in Bellingham, Washington. Previously he worked for the Washington State Legislature as a policy analyst specializing in Trade, Economic Development and Housing issues. A Navy Reservist, Cole recently spent 15 months on deployment to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. There, he worked as an intelligence analyst and as an embedded trainer to his counterparts in the Afghan National Army. Cole also has an extensive multimedia background including graphic design, broadcast radio and journalism. He received his B.A. in Political Studies from Whitworth University in Spokane with minors in History and Speech Communication and has trained with the Leadership Institute in Arlington, Virginia. He has a beautiful wife and a dog in exile. Views expressed here are entirely his own and do not reflect those of Matt’s employer.
2 comments:
This is inductive reasoning. You always get this wrong. Let's have a lesson: Deductive reasoning is where you take certain premises, put them together, and the conclusion MUST be true. For example, Premise 1) Socrates is a man, P2) All men are mortal, Conclusion) Socrates is mortal. See how the conlusion must be true? If P1 and P2 are true, the conclusion has to be true. This is deduction.
Induction is similar, but if the premises of an inductive argument are true, the conlusion is LIKELY to be true--not certain to be true. For example, P1) The streets are wet, P2) When the streets are wet it has usually rained, C) Therefore, it has probably rained. See how the conclusion is not a MUST but is LIKELY? The streets could be wet because kids had a waterballoon fight or a firehydrant burst. Inductive reasoning, for instance, is how we know the Sun is going to rise tomorrow. We don't know it with certainty, but it is a pretty good bet because it always has in the past. It is not a LOGICAL NECESSITY. But, if Socrates is a man, and all men are mortal, it IS a logical must that Socrates is mortal.
--Banks
Hey, you have a great blog here! I'm definitely going to bookmark you!
I have a site http://www.discount-spanish-property.co.uk/ it pretty much covers
spanish property for sale related stuff come and have a look
Post a Comment