The document provides an introduction to inductive reasoning by distinguishing it from deductive reasoning. It notes that deductive arguments involve necessary reasoning from premises that necessarily support the conclusion, while inductive arguments involve probabilistic reasoning from premises that probably but not necessarily support the conclusion. Examples of deductive and inductive arguments are provided. Key indicators of deductive and inductive arguments are discussed. Different types of arguments that are best treated as deductive or inductive are outlined.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
The document provides an introduction to inductive reasoning by distinguishing it from deductive reasoning. It notes that deductive arguments involve necessary reasoning from premises that necessarily support the conclusion, while inductive arguments involve probabilistic reasoning from premises that probably but not necessarily support the conclusion. Examples of deductive and inductive arguments are provided. Key indicators of deductive and inductive arguments are discussed. Different types of arguments that are best treated as deductive or inductive are outlined.
The document provides an introduction to inductive reasoning by distinguishing it from deductive reasoning. It notes that deductive arguments involve necessary reasoning from premises that necessarily support the conclusion, while inductive arguments involve probabilistic reasoning from premises that probably but not necessarily support the conclusion. Examples of deductive and inductive arguments are provided. Key indicators of deductive and inductive arguments are discussed. Different types of arguments that are best treated as deductive or inductive are outlined.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
The document provides an introduction to inductive reasoning by distinguishing it from deductive reasoning. It notes that deductive arguments involve necessary reasoning from premises that necessarily support the conclusion, while inductive arguments involve probabilistic reasoning from premises that probably but not necessarily support the conclusion. Examples of deductive and inductive arguments are provided. Key indicators of deductive and inductive arguments are discussed. Different types of arguments that are best treated as deductive or inductive are outlined.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 50
Inductive Reasoning An Introduction
Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments
Deductive arguments are arguments whose premises are claimed to support the conclusion in such a way that it is impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion be false. * The conclusion necessarily follows from the premises.
Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments
Inductive arguments are arguments whose premises are claimed to support the conclusion in such a way that it is improbable for the premises to be true and the conclusion be false. * The conclusion is claimed to follow only probably from the premises.
1. The meerkat is closely related to the suricat. 2. The suricat thrives on beetle larvae. 3. Therefore, probably the meerkat trives on beetle larvae. 1. The meerkat is a member of the mongoose family. 2. All members of the mongoose family family are carnivores . 3. It necessarily follows that the meerkat is a carnivore.
Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments
1. The meerkat is closely related to the suricat. 2. The suricat thrives on beetle larvae. 3. Therefore, probably the meerkat trives on beetle larvae. INDUCTIVE ARGUMENT 1. The meerkat is a member of the mongoose family. 2. All members of the mongoose family family are carnivores . 3. It necessarily follows that the meerkat is a carnivore. DEDUCIVE ARGUMENT
Evaluative measures 1. The occurrence of special indicator words 2. The actual strength of the inferential link between premises and conclusion 3. The character or form of argumentation the arguer uses
Deductive vs. Inductive Arguments
(1) The meerkat is closely related to the suricat. (2) The suricat thrives on beetle larvae. (3) Therefore, probably the meerkat trives on beetle larvae. INDUCTIVE ARGUMENT (a) The meerkat si a member of the mongoose family. (b) All members of the mongoose family family are carnivores . (c) It necessarily follows that the meerkat is a carnivore. DEDUCIVE ARGUMENT
Special cases it must be the case that must: ambiguous;can indicate probability or necessity it certainly follows that certainly: not automatically deduction since
Evaluative measures 1. The occurrence of special indicator words 2. The actual strength of the inferential link between premises and conclusion 3. The character or form of argumentation the arguer uses
Actual Strength of Inferential Link bet. P & C
Deductive: If the conclusion follows with strict necessity from the premises Inductive: If the conclusion follows probably from the premises
Actual Strength of Inferential Link bet. P & C
(1) All saleswomen are extroverts. (2) Elizabeth Taylor is a saleswoman. (3) Therefore, Elizabeth Taylor is an extrovert. (a) The vast majority of saleswomen are extroverts. (b) Elizabeth Taylor is a salewoman. (c) Therefore, Elizabeth Taylor is an extrovert.
Actual Strength of Inferential Link bet. P & C
(1) All saleswomen are extroverts. (2) Elizabeth Taylor is a saleswoman. (3) Therefore, Elizabeth Taylor is an extrovert. DEDUCTIVE ARGUMENT (a) The vast majority of saleswomen are extroverts. (b) Elizabeth Taylor is a salewoman. (c) Therefore, Elizabeth Taylor is an extrovert. INDUCTIVE ARGUMENT
Evaluative measures 1. The occurrence of special indicator words 2. The actual strength of the inferential link between premises and conclusion 3. The character or form of argumentation the arguer uses
Arguments best treated as deductive
Arguments based on mathematics Argument from definition Categorical syllogism Hypothetical syllogism Disjunctive syllogism
Arguments best treated as deductive
1. Argument based on mathematics - C depends on some purely arithmetic or geometric computation or measurement Ex. 2 avocado + 6 lansones = 8 fruits * statistics - inductive
2. Argument from definition - C depends merely upon the definition of some word or phrase used in the premise or conclusion Ex. Claudia is mendacious A certain paragraph is prolix
Arguments best treated as deductive
3. Categorical syllogism - a syllogism (an argument consisting of exactly 2 premises and 1 conclusion) in with each statement begins with one of the words all, no, or some Ex. All lasers are optical devices. Some lasers are surgical instruments. Therefore, some optical devices are surgical instruments.
Arguments best treated as deductive
4. Hypothetical syllogism - A syllogism having a conditional statement (if-then) for 1 or both its premises (a) If electricity flows through a conductor, then a magnetic field is produced. (b) If a magnetic field is produced, then a nearby compass will be deflected. (c) Therefore, if electricity flows through a conductor, then a nearby compass will be deflected.
(d) If quartz scratches glass, then quartz is harder than glass. (e) Quartz scratches glass. (f) Therefore, quartz is harder than glass.
Arguments best treated as deductive
5. Disjunctive syllogism - A syllogism having a disjunctive statement (eitheror) for one of its premises (a) Either a breach of contract is a crime or it is not punishable by the state. (b) Breach of contract is not a crime. (c) Therefore, it is not punishable by the state.
Arguments best treated as inductive
Disjunctive syllogism Prediction Argument from analogy Inductive generalization Argument from authority Argument based on signs Causal inference
Arguments best treated as inductive
1. Predictions about the future - The premises deal with some known event in the present or past, and the conclusion moves beyond this event to some event in the relative future Ex. Because certain meteorological phenomena have been observed to develop over a certain region of central Missouri, a storm will occur there in 6 hours. Because certain fluctuations occurred in the prime interest rate on Friday, the value of the dollar will decrease against foreign currencies on Monday.
Arguments best treated as inductive
2. Argument from analogy - An argument that depends on the existence of an analogy, or similarity, bet. 2 things or states of affairs - A certain condition that affects the better-known thing or situation is concluded to affect the similar, lesser-known thing or situation
Arguments best treated as inductive
3. Inductive Generalization - An argument that proceeds from the knowledge of a selected sample to some claim about the whole group Ex. statistics
Arguments best treated as inductive
4. Argument from Authority - An argument in which the conclusion rests upon a statement made by some presumed authority or witness
Arguments best treated as inductive
4. Argument based on signs - An argument that proceeds from the knowledge of a certain sign to a knowledge of the thing or situation that the sign symbolizes
Arguments best treated as inductive
5. A causal inference - Arguments that proceed from knowledge of a cause to knowledge of the effect, or, conversely, from knowledge of an effect to knowledge of a cause
How well do you know?
No email messages are eloquent creations. Some love letters are eloquent creations. Therefore, some love letters are not email messages.
No email messages are eloquent creations. Some love letters are eloquent creations. Therefore, some love letters are not email messages.
DEDUCTION
The last time I ate here, the shrimp dish I ordered was disgusting. It must be the case that this restaurant buys lousy seafood.
The last time I ate here, the shrimp dish I ordered was disgusting. It must be the case that this restaurant buys lousy seafood.
INDUCTION
All guitar players are musicians. Some guitar players are not astronauts. Therefore, some musicians are not astronauts.
All guitar players are musicians. Some guitar players are not astronauts. Therefore, some musicians are not astronauts.
DEDUCTION
It was raining on Monday. It was raining on Tuesday. It was raining on Wednesday. It was raining on Thursday. It was raining on Friday. It was raining on Saturday. Therefore, it would rain on Sunday.
It was raining on Monday. It was raining on Tuesday. It was raining on Wednesday. It was raining on Thursday. It was raining on Friday. It was raining on Saturday. Therefore, it would rain on Sunday.
INDUCTION
My birthday is six days after my sister's birthday. My birthday is on the 12th. Therefore, my sister's birthday is on the 18th.
My birthday is six days after my sister's birthday. My birthday is on the 12th. Therefore, my sister's birthday is on the 18th.
DEDUCTION
The sum of the interior angles of any triangle is 180. In triangle #1, angle A is 30, angle B is 90. Therefore, angle C is 60.
The sum of the interior angles of any triangle is 180. In triangle #1, angle A is 30, angle B is 90. Therefore, angle C is 60.
DEDUCTION
(True/False) If an argument contains the phrase it definitely follows that, then we know for certain that the argument is deductive.
(True/False) If an argument contains the phrase it definitely follows that, then we know for certain that the argument is deductive.
(True/False) An argument that proceeds from knowledge of a cause to knowledge of an effect is an inductive argument.
(True/False) An argument that proceeds from knowledge of a cause to knowledge of an effect is an inductive argument.
(True/False) Most arguments based on statistical reasoning are deductive.
(True/False) Most arguments based on statistical reasoning are deductive.
(True/False) In a deductive argument, it is improbable for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
(True/False) In a deductive argument, it is improbable for the premises to be true and the conclusion false.
Phillip Honenberger (Eds.) - Naturalism and Philosophical Anthropology - Nature, Life, and The Human Between Transcendental and Empirical Perspectives (2015, Palgrave Macmillan UK) PDF
Phillip Honenberger (Eds.) - Naturalism and Philosophical Anthropology - Nature, Life, and The Human Between Transcendental and Empirical Perspectives (2015, Palgrave Macmillan UK) PDF
