1/16/15 Webinar Notes Logic and Reasoning for Writing Appraisal Reports

Dont use the word estimate. It has no place in an appraisal. And estimate is an assertion.
An appraisal is an opinion of value, which is based on fact. And estimate is not based on
fact. Youre proving value, not estimating value, in an appraisal.
Clauses - Restrictive and Nonrestrictive
1. Restrictive and Nonrestrictive Clauses Defined. Restrictive clauses limit the possible
meaning of a preceding subject. Nonrestrictive clauses tell you something about a preceding
subject, but they do not limit, or restrict, the meaning of that subject. Compare the following
examples.
Correct Restrictive Use:
The suspect in the lineup who has red hair committed the crime.
Note how the subject "suspect" in this sentence is restricted in two ways: we know
that this suspect is both in the lineup and has red hair. As a result, we know that the
other suspects, who are not in the lineup, could not have committed the crime.
Moreover, of those suspects in the lineup, we know that the one suspect in the lineup
with red hair committed the crime. If there were more than one suspect in the lineup
with red hair, the above usage would be incorrect because it implies a different
meaning.
Correct Nonrestrictive Use:
The suspect in the lineup, who owns a red car, committed the crime.
In this example, the restrictive clause "in the lineup" tells us that of all possible
suspects in the world, the one who committed the crime is in the lineup. However,
while the nonrestrictive clause "who owns a red car" tells us something about the
suspect, it does not foreclose the possibility that there are several different suspects
in the lineup with red cars. The car color may tell us something useful, but it does not
restrict us to only one possibility.
2. When choosing between "that" and "which," use "that" to introduce a restrictive
clause and "which" to introduce a nonrestrictive clause. Although some writers use
"which" to introduce a restrictive clause, the traditional practice is to use "that" to
introduce a restrictive clause and "which" to introduce a nonrestrictive clause. When
writing a restrictive clause, do not place a comma before "that." When writing a
nonrestrictive clause, do place a comma before "which."

Correct Restrictive Use:

The store honored the complaints that were less than 60 days old.
Correct Nonrestrictive Use:
The store honored the complaints, which were less than 60 days old.
These sentences have different meanings as well as different punctuation. In the
restrictive sentence, the store honored only those complaints less than 60 days old,
but not those over 60 days old. In the nonrestrictive sentence, the store honored all
the complaints, all of which were less than 60 days old.
3. Place proper punctuation around nonrestrictive clauses, but do not place
punctuation around restrictive clauses. When a nonrestrictive clause appears in the
middle of a sentence, place commas around it. When a nonrestrictive clause appears
at the end of a sentence, place a comma before it and a period after it. Do not
punctuate restrictive clauses.
Correct Punctuation of Nonrestrictive Clause:
The 1964 Ford Mustang, which propelled Lee Iacocca to the top of the
automobile industry, is now considered a classic.
Correct Punctuation of Nonrestrictive Clause:
The credit card is in my wallet, which you can find in the kitchen drawer.
Correct Punctuation of Restrictive Clause:
The boat that sailed on October 25 is the one to which we referred in the
contract.

Deductive argument based on what you already know. Black and white because of
evidence.
Inductive argument everything is gray. Only have some degree of support for argument.
Must be based on logic more than evidence.

http://atheism.about.com/od/criticalthinking/a/deductivearg.htm
Arguments can be separated into two categories: deductive and inductive.

What is a Deductive Argument?

A deductive argument is one in which it is impossible for the premises to be true but the
conclusion false. Thus, the conclusion follows necessarily from the premises and inferences.
In this way, it is supposed to be a definitive proof of the truth of the claim (conclusion). Here
is a classic example:
1.
2.
3.

All men are mortal. (premise)

Socrates was a man. (premise)
Socrates was mortal. (conclusion)

As you can see, if the premises are true (and they are), then it simply isn't possible for the
conclusion to be false. If you have a deductive argument and you accept the truth of the
premises, then you must also accept the truth of the conclusion; if you reject it, then you are
rejecting logic itself.

What is an Inductive Argument?

An inductive argument is one in which the premises are supposed to support the conclusion
in such a way that if the premises are true, it is improbable that the conclusion would be
false. Thus, the conclusion follows probably from the premises and inferences. Here is an
example:
1.
2.
3.

Socrates was Greek. (premise)

Most Greeks eat fish. (premise)
Socrates ate fish. (conclusion)

In this example, even if both premises are true, it is still possible for the conclusion to be
false (maybe Socrates was allergic to fish, for example). Words which tend to mark an
argument as inductive - and hence probabilistic rather than necessary - include probably,
likely, possibly and reasonably.

Deductive Arguments vs. Inductive Arguments

It may seem that inductive arguments are weaker than deductive arguments because there
must always remain the possibility of their arriving at false conclusions, but that is not
entirely true. With deductive arguments, our conclusions are already contained, even if
implicitly, in our premises. This means that we don't arrive at new information - at best, we
are shown information which was obscured or unrecognized previously. Thus, the sure truthpreserving nature of deductive arguments comes at a cost.

Inductive arguments, on the other hand, do provide us with new ideas and thus may expand
our knowledge about the world in a way that is impossible for deductive arguments to
achieve. Thus, while deductive arguments may be used most often with mathematics, most
other fields of research make extensive use of inductive arguments.

---

I say so therefore it is.

Ipse dixit, Latin for "he, himself, said it," is a term used to identify and describe a sort of
arbitrary dogmatic statement, which the speaker expects the listener to accept as valid.[1]

The fallacy of defending a proposition by baldly asserting that it is "just how it is" distorts
the argument by opting out of it entirely: the claimant declares an issue to be intrinsic, and
not changeable.[2]

Those things which now seem frivolous and slight will be serious consequences to you
when they have made you ridiculous. Wentworth Dillon, 4th Earl of Roscommon