The Second Rule for Evaluating Inductive Generalizations Is to Look

question 10

Multiple Choice

The second rule for evaluating inductive generalizations is to look for disconfirming instances.How is this rule used to evaluate the strength of arguments by analogy?

• A)It cannot be used since inductive generalization has no relevance to arguments by analogy.
• B)The conclusion of the deductive step is a generalization, so we attempt to think of exceptions to that generalization.
• C)The conclusion of the inductive step is a generalization, so we attempt to think of exceptions to that generalization.
• D)The conclusion of the entire argument by analogy will be a generalization, so we attempt to think of exceptions to that generalization.
• E)We look for any premises that don't seem to support the conclusion and then exclude them from the argument to make it stronger.

---

Definitions:

Patient's Belongings

Personal items that a patient brings with them to a healthcare setting, which can include clothing, accessories, and electronic devices.

Unintentional Torts

Legal incidents in which harm is caused by negligence or unintentional actions, not by deliberate wrongdoing.

Malpractice

A type of negligence by a professional resulting in harm or damage to a patient or client.

Negligence

Failure to take reasonable care or steps to prevent loss or injury to another person, often leading to legal liability.