Inductive and deductive arguments?

Question

Okay so I get the definitions of both the arguments but when it comes to examples, i can't solve them. What is the main difference between these two arguments and how can you tell if its inductive or deductive?

Answer 1

Identify the concluding proposition and ask "given the premises, could this conclusion be guaranteed true or would it at best be probably true?"

I say "could and "would" because you have not stated whether the premises of an example argument are true.

But, I do not say anything about whether the argument is validly or soundly structured, because I think we are assuming here that they are, insofar as we're calling them bonafide deductive and inductive arguments.

To sum, if the truth of the conclusion is guaranteed the argument is deductive.

Also, you can check your answer roughly as follows. If the conclusion is a generalization argued from particulars, most likely if you had decided that the argument is inductive (using the test laid out above) then bingo you were correct. But if the conclusion is a particular argued from some generalization, most likley you already will have decided that it is deductive. It's a rough double check. (Remember the old syllogism about Socrates being mortal? It starts with a generality (all men are mortal), and concludes with a particular (Socrates is mortal)).

Using these methods you will get it correct almost every time, until you get better at working with them.

Answer 2

Deduction:
allows deriving b as a consequence of a. In other words, deduction is the process of deriving the consequences of what is assumed. Given the truth of the assumptions, a valid deduction guarantees the truth of the conclusion.

Induction:
allows inferring some a from multiple instantiations of b when a entails b. Induction is the process of inferring probable antecedents as a result of observing multiple consequents.

Strong induction

All observed crows are black.
therefore,
All crows are black.

Weak induction

I always hang pictures on nails.
therefore
All pictures hang from nails.

Deductive, for instance, beginning with the premises "sharks are fish" and "all fish have fins", you may conclude that "sharks have fins". This is distinguished from inductive reasoning and abductive reasoning where inferences can be made with some likelihood but never with complete certainty.

Answer 3

My personal erroneous understanding is that deductive reasoning uses a subtractive result in its process based on evidence for impossibility or unlikelihood for a number of other possible assumptions derived from perceivable and infer-able (induced) facts and that what remains, persists or comes into being as explanation for a things time and place, is factual. Inductive reasoning is using the 'all x' are y'' contingency for identification, but we are assuming we are looking for an x'. Other evidence could rule out the possibility that x' is the correct assumption.

The Will is positive, the Judgment is negative.

Answer 4

Deduction is moving from accepted premises to a certain conclusion. The classic argument is:

a)Socrates is a man

b)All men are mortal

Therefore Socrates is mortal. If you accept both of the premises (a and b), then the conclusion is certain.

Inductive reasoning is, broadly, any reasoning that is not deductive. More narrowly it refers to reasoning from observed instances to unobserved instances. So, having tested thousands of pieces of copper, the scientist moves from the observation that "these pieces of copper conduct electricity" to "all pieces of copper conduct electricity." His inductive reasoning allows him to take what he has observed and make a claim about what he has not observed (all the rest of the copper in the universe). Obviously inductive reasoning is not nearly as certain as deductive reasoning, but it does form the basis of modern science.

Answer 5

It can be constructed as either inductive or deductive, depending on the version.

Answer 6

inductive results are obtained by an act or an instant.

deductive results are reached by theories and conclusions