Facts has the power to influence others. Opinion does not have the power to influence others.
Facts, truth and inferences 10 April In this column I have previously spoken of the litigator as a story teller. I have also written on the influence of truth on the creation of narratives.
Here, I would like to discuss the tools with which instructive and persuasive stories are built — whether they be in fact, in law or in both fact and law. The most persuasive advocates are not necessarily those with the highest IQ.
The main problem with trying to compare "fact" and "inference" is that it is an odd pairing. Logicians or communication theorists distinguish between "premises" and "inferences", where a premise. inductive inference - a conclusion based on repeated observation of fact. Drop a particular kind of ball on a particular floor from a particular height numerous (n) times, and you can, by induction from those examples, make an inference and a prediction about what will happen the next time you drop the ball. Inference. In the law of evidence, a truth or proposition drawn from another that is supposed or admitted to be true. A process of reasoning by which a fact or proposition sought to be established is deduced as a logical consequence from other facts, or a state of facts, already proved or admitted. A logical and reasonable conclusion of a fact not presented by direct evidence but which, by.
They are also not those who can necessarily construct the most complex of legal arguments. The most persuasive of advocates are, I believe, counsel who understand human nature, who understand how to construct a narrative and to deliver it with the skill of a story teller, drawing the listener in to their world, manufactured according to basic principles of logic and reason.
Many of the great advocates have developed their skills through experience and Fact or inference development of judgement. But one need not entirely rely upon experience and the development of judgement to be a proficient advocate — they are skills that can be taught.
Good, clear, convincing argumentation and the ability to successfully deconstruct and critique the arguments of others can and should be taught to our undergraduate law students for this to be followed through into continuing professional education.
Inferences Let us take one aspect of good argumentation — inferences.
Great advocates know how far they can push inferences from the evidence at hand. Such an exercise is laced with pitfalls. Too often case theories outstrip the facts upon which they are supposedly based.
Factual assertions often stretch beyond that which is necessary. Unnecessary elements appear in theories often in an effort by advocates to present a complete story with little awareness that a failure to establish such superfluous elements undermines those necessary and good elements of a case theory.
Conversely, in some cases gaps are created or left unplugged in ignorance of their significance to the establishment of the legal case whether that be for the prosecution, defence, plaintiff or respondent.
Circumstantial evidence is the bedrock of inferential reasoning. Circumstantial evidence will often form the base of a strong case, again, in both the criminal and civil jurisdiction alike. But the inferences drawn from prospectant, concomitant, and retrospective circumstantial evidence is all too often tenuous — and seemingly unwittingly so.
Seeing the frequent stretch of conclusions from circumstantial evidence, I am drawn to the conclusion that the generalisation or premise upon which such inferences are co-founded must have remain unsaid, unacknowledged and therefore unscrutinised when formulated in the mind of the advocate.
What do I mean by this? Arguments ought to follow the basic rules of logic.
Top Making Inference Quizzes & Trivia. Making Connections With Transitiona Making Inferences. Do you know what types of intelligences are considered most popular? Can you describe the different tests that one can take to gauge their intelligence? Making inference is one of the intelligence tests that you can find today, one which sees how. Apr 23, · Remind him an inference is an idea that is suggested, but not stated as a fact. Ask him to draw a couple of inferences from the article about global warming. Then have him write those on the chart.3/5(41). The main problem with trying to compare "fact" and "inference" is that it is an odd pairing. Logicians or communication theorists distinguish between "premises" and "inferences", where a premise.
An established premise stands side by side with an established premise[s] from which a cogent argument can be drawn if the principle of valid reasoning is followed.
Reasoning Failure to identify a generalisation upon which a conclusion is drawn is tantamount to withdrawing a key premise and therefore threatens the cogency of the conclusion by undermining the validity of the reasoning.
Failure to identify the generalisation does not mean, of course, that it does not exist. Let me give an example. In attempting to establish the factual assertion that Rover is a dog, we might identify the fact that Rover barks. If we attempt to draw our conclusion from this alone the argument is incomplete — it is a non sequitur.
Of course we would not attempt to draw such an inference on the one piece of evidence — that Rover barks. What we must do is expressly identify the remaining premise[s] upon which we seek to rely — namely our generalisation that all dogs bark.
All generalisations in such cases need to be blatantly obvious. If they are not then it is likely we open ourselves to challenge and at worst open ourselves to the possibility that the fact finder will not agree with our inference and therefore reject our factual proposition.
Of course, in our Rover example our argument remains a non sequitur even with our second premise — it suffers from invalid reasoning. This could be fixed in one of two ways. A glib approach to mapping this seemingly simply argument could have resulted in a line of invalid reasoning or at the very least very weak reasoning.
Exposing premises There is great benefit to clearly exposing all premises relied upon whether they be items of real evidence or mere presumptions, biases, generalisations or even prejudices. The first is that we are much better placed to clearly identify any weakness in our arguments before such a state of affairs is identified by others.
All generalisations ought to be clear, simple and unassailable.Another definition of inference suggests that it is rational but non-logical, which means that, through the observation of facts presented in a particular pattern, one ultimately sees different or new interpretations and perspectives.
reasonable inference, but, nonetheless, it is an inference because it is your observation stated in the language of opinion rather than in the language of fact. An inference . Fact=any piece of information that can be verified form a source is fact.
Never mix truth and fact. Judgement=personal opinion of approval, disapproval and non-quantifable qualifications. Inference=(Fact and judgement) A conclusion drawn about unk. In Vann -v-Ocidental  EWCA Civ the Court of Appeal overturned a finding that there was no contributory negligence.
There is an interesting discussion about appeals on findings of fact and the inferences that the judge draws from those facts.
THE CASE. The action arose out of a road traffic accident that occurred in Portugal. Definition of inference: An assumption or conclusion that is rationally and logically made, based on the given facts or circumstances. An inference is based off of facts.
An inference is something that is inferred, or implied, by the existence of two conditions. For this, every manager, supervisors and Human Resource representative should be trained to be a fact .
|Inferences Worksheets | Ereading Worksheets||Fact, Inference or Judgement - June 11th, Introduction Any statement can belong to one of the three types.|
|Difference Between Inference And Prediction | Difference Between | Inference And Prediction||Fact, Inference, or Opinion There are three basic classifications of all statements made about history.|