What do you think about Acheson's take on inductive reasoning? How does it fit (or not fit) with some of the terms/methods/ideas we've been discussing in class?
top of page
Introduction to English Studies
Instructor: Mat Wenzel, MFA, M.Ed.
E-Mail: mwenzel@fsu.edu
Office: WMS 331 Office Hours: T/R 9:15 to 10:45 SYLLABUS
Search
Recent Posts
See AllWhat part of Acheson's chapter on social and historical contexts be most useful for your final project. This, of course, will vary widely...
Did Acheson give helpful strategies for researching within a text? If so, which one(s)? Did Acheson reshape your thinking about...
How does Brian Reed use imagery and figurative language (metaphor, simile, personification) in S-town? And/Or how would you apply it to...
12 commentaires
bottom of page
I think she made sense in saying that you should start with something that is as specific as you could possibly get and watch it grow and grow and grow into something very broad. Her statement that things that are too specific could not possibly be true gave me chills because it just made so much sense to me at the time. You can never truly prove something it made me feel. It made me feel a sense of you can argue any point at any time because nothing truly makes sense.
I agree with Acheson's concept of inductive reasoning being that I think that it is possible to have specifics be indicative of the whole. It applies to us when trying to analyze a text and understanding its greater social and cultural statements. It fits with discussions of S-Town in how we can analyze the specific miseries and characterizations and apply it to a greater discussion of identity in Southern America.
According to Acheson, inductive reasoning is when you analyze examples in order to draw broader conclusions. I think this fits with what we do in class because we frequently look at texts from shittown to tweets and we look at one narrow instance and are able to bring it out into the scope of society and our own personal experiences.
(lol when I see grades popping up on canvas and realize I never responded to this one)
Acheson presents inductive reasoning as a process of analyzing other texts in order to better form an opinion or gather support for an essay. This idea fits with our methods of researching other texts and written works in order to understand what other writers are saying about a topic. This allows us to build on what has already been said instead of making an accusation in our thesis that is not build on fact. However, coming to a conclusion through inductive reasoning frees us from having to make a claim that is definitive and allows for flexibility within an essay.
I hadn't ever thought about writing literary criticism like this before, but I think it makes sense. Because literature is so varied and rich, as Acheson says, deductive reasoning might be a good place to start thinking about what kind of criticisms you want to write, but it won't be useful much longer after that. We're going over inductive and deductive reasoning in the speech class I'm taking, and it's good to see that it'll be useful in other things as well.