Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of reasoning as a Way of Knowing.

Authors Avatar

Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of reasoning as a Way of Knowing.

        There are certain characteristics of the human mind that play different and vital roles in the acquisition of knowledge, the process of understanding and the analysis of this knowledge. In knowledge itself, the different Areas of Knowledge and Ways of Knowing (emotion, language, perception and reason) present people with many opportunities for means of interpretation, understanding and also the communication of information. Reasoning as a Way of Knowing is a particularly interesting characteristic of the human intellect because people, by nature, are able to think intuitively, without restraint and in such a way that a primary piece of information can be processed through reasoning to gain further understanding. In this way, people are capable of acquiring knowledge by compiling a number of facts, interpreting them and by way of reasoning, 'finding them to be true'. In short, reasoning can be defined as any process which involves drawing a conclusion from a set of premises. In the different Areas of Knowledge, reasoning comes in different forms and plays a range of roles as a Way of Knowing, depending on the nature of the information.    

        In the following essay, I will make an attempt to unearth and analyze the logic and some of the key theories linked with reasoning and its role as a Way of Knowing. In doing so, I will investigate various circumstances to find occasions where reasoning falls short and in addition, I will hopefully be able to make judgements as to whether reasoning is completely legitimate in all Areas of Knowledge and how its strengths and weaknesses add up to give an overall view of its importance.

Join now!

        One of the shortcomings of reasoning can be portrayed through the example of a fallacy which is when reasoning is illogical, misleading and/or erroneous and suggests false notions. For example, one could speculate the following argument, 'nothing is better than winning the lottery, sleeping for four hours is better than nothing, therefore sleeping for four hours is better than winning the lottery'. This is an example of a fallacy of composition or a syntactic fallacy and is an obvious example of disingenuous reasoning. In this case, two factual statements are connected by the word 'nothing' and the third one follows, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay