Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Inductive reasoning is any of various methods of reasoning in which broad generalizations or principles are derived from a body of observations. [1] [2] Inductive reasoning is in contrast to deductive reasoning (such as mathematical induction), where the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, given the premises are correct; in contrast, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive ...
While deductive logic allows one to arrive at a conclusion with certainty, inductive logic can only provide a conclusion that is probably true. [non-primary source needed] It is mistaken to frame the difference between deductive and inductive logic as one between general to specific reasoning and specific to general reasoning. This is a common ...
In this way, it contrasts with deductive reasoning examined by formal logic. [35] Non-deductive arguments make their conclusion probable but do not ensure that it is true. An example is the inductive argument from the empirical observation that "all ravens I have seen so far are black" to the conclusion "all ravens are black". [36]
Deductive reasoning is the building of knowledge based on what has been shown to be true before. It requires the assumption of fact established prior, and, given the truth of the assumptions, a valid deduction guarantees the truth of the conclusion. Inductive reasoning builds knowledge not from established truth, but from a body of observations.
Unlike many other forms of syllogism, a statistical syllogism is inductive, so when evaluating this kind of argument it is important to consider how strong or weak it is, along with the other rules of induction (as opposed to deduction). In the above example, if 99% of people are taller than 26 inches, then the probability of the conclusion ...
Each one has a name (for example, argument from effect to cause) and presents a type of connection between premises and a conclusion in an argument, and this connection is expressed as a rule of inference. Argumentation schemes can include inferences based on different types of reasoning—deductive, inductive, abductive, probabilistic, etc.
Forms of logical reasoning can be distinguished based on how the premises support the conclusion. Deductive arguments offer the strongest possible support. Non-deductive arguments are weaker but are nonetheless correct forms of reasoning. [28] [29] The term "proof" is often used for deductive arguments or very strong non-deductive arguments. [30]
Such reasoning itself, or the chain of intermediates representing it, has also been called an argument, more fully a deductive argument. In many cases, an argument can be known to be valid by means of a deduction of its conclusion from its premises but non-deductive methods such as Venn diagrams and other graphic procedures have been proposed.