For this class, you’ll also need to be aware and be able to apply these terms:
Stereotypes are considered to be a group concept, held by one social group about another. They are often used in a negative or prejudicial sense and are frequently used to justify certain discriminatory behaviours. More benignly, they may express sometimes-accurate folk wisdom about social reality.
Often a stereotype is a negative caricature or inversion of some positive characteristic possessed by members of a group, exaggerated to the point where it becomes repulsive or ridiculous.
Stereotype production is based on :
"Inductive reasoning" (not to be confused with "mathematical induction" or and "inductive proof", which is something quite different) is the process of reasoning that a general principle is true because the special cases you've seen are true. For example, if all the people you've ever met from a particular town have been very strange, you might then say "all the residents of this town are strange". That is inductive reasoning: constructing a general principle from special cases. It goes in the opposite direction from deductive reasoning.
Inductive reasoning is not logically valid. Just because all the people you happen to have met from a town were strange is no guarantee that all the people there are strange.
This is just the opposite if inductive reasoning where you look at a group and draw a conclusion about the group, and then you apply the same conclusion about each and every member of that group.
It's like stereotyping, but it's not always negative.
It's like saying most people in the town like chili cheese fries; therefore, everyone in the town likes chili cheese fries.
Deductive reasoning has it's strong points, but sometimes it can be invalid as well.
Your job then was to read back through "Cathedral" and find two examples of stereotyping, inductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning.
For some practice, please click this link and do the exercises: http://www2.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/induc/ind-ded.html