The following mechanism applies to many of the valid deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning forms: Cause+Rule-Effect In the case of deductive reasoning, the premises represent the Rule and square as our conclusion Based on these premises we try to identify square square Based on these premises we try to identify square as our conclusion In the case of abductive reasoning, the premises represent the Effect and the square as our conclusion - Based on these premises we try to identify square

The mechanism described in the question is commonly used in various forms of logical reasoning, including deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning. In this mechanism, the "Cause + Rule - Effect" relationship is used to draw conclusions based on premises.<br /><br />In the case of deductive reasoning, the premises represent the Rule, and the conclusion is the Effect. Based on these premises, we try to identify the Effect as our conclusion. In other words, if we know that a certain Rule is true, we can deduce the Effect that follows from that Rule.<br /><br />In the case of abductive reasoning, the premises represent the Effect, and the conclusion is the Cause. Based on these premises, we try to identify the Cause as our conclusion. In other words, if we observe an Effect, we try to infer the Cause that could have led to that Effect.<br /><br />Therefore, the missing words in the question are:<br /><br />* In the case of deductive reasoning, the premises represent the Rule, and the Effect as our conclusion.<br />* Based on these premises we try to identify the Effect as our conclusion.<br />* In the case of abductive reasoning, the premises represent the Effect, and the Cause as our conclusion.<br />* Based on these premises we try to identify the Cause as our conclusion.