What relationships exist among reasoning, evidence, and explanation?
Reasoning is used to connect the evidence and the explanation.
Evidence is used to connect the explanation and the reasoning.
Evidence is associated directly with explanation, but not reasoning.
Reasoning is associated directly with explanation, but not evidence
In order to provide a clear and convincing explanation for a claim or argument, one needs to use reasoning to analyze and connect the evidence that supports the claim. Evidence is the factual support that is used to build an argument, while reasoning is the thought process that helps us understand how that evidence is relevant to the argument at hand. In this way, reasoning connects the evidence to the explanation by showing how the evidence supports the claim being made.
However, evidence can also be used to directly support an explanation without the need for reasoning. For example, a scientific experiment may yield clear results that directly confirm or disprove a particular hypothesis or theory. In this case, the evidence itself is enough to support the explanation without the need for additional reasoning.
Similarly, reasoning may be used to support an explanation without the need for specific evidence. In some cases, logical analysis or deductive reasoning may be used to arrive at a conclusion without needing to gather new evidence. For example, a mathematical proof may rely on logical reasoning to demonstrate the validity of a particular theorem.
Overall, reasoning, evidence, and explanation are all interconnected and necessary components of effective argumentation and critical thinking. While they may each play different roles in different contexts, they are all essential for building compelling and convincing arguments.