Understanding Inductive Reasoning

Inductive reasoning: Reasoning that draws a general conclusion based on a set of examples.

Basic pattern of Inductive Reasoning

a, b, c, d, e, f, g and h are part of group A.

a, b, c, d, e, f, g and h have property G.

All member of group A have property G.

In Science it starts with observations and sees the patterns in the observations developing a hypothesis as general description of the observations.

The benefits of Inductive Reasoning are that it allows for general conclusions to be drawn from specific observations evidence, allowing conclusions based on patterns in observations and evidence.

Problems with Inductive Reasoning include the possibility that the sample size may be too small for a general conclusion. It is prone to being affected by philosophical assumptions and biases in selection of sample, in the patterns recognized, and in conclusions drawn from those

Understanding Deductive Reasoning

Deductive reasoning: Reasoning that starts with a given set premises and draws a conclusion.

Deductive reasoning goes from general to specific by starting with a given set premises and draws conclusions from them. The conclusions are only as valid as the premises that are used and it only one false premise can produce a false conclusion. In a valid deductive argument its truth necessarily follows from the starting premises and it is sound if the argument is valid and all of its premises are true other wise it is considered unsound.

A common form of deductive reasoning is called a syllogism It has three parts.

All X has y.

A general characteristic of a category of objects.

A is X.

The object under discussion belongs to that category

A has y.

The conclusion that the object under discussion has that general characteristic.

Deductive reasoning is that it is heavily dependent on the validity of premises that are used. Premises may be facts derived from observation or a totally philosophical assumption.

For example proponents of the Big Bang Cosmology. All observations of the universe are constant with the Earth being near the center so starting with the philosophical assumption that we are totally the result of natural process; as opposed to being created by God; it is a logically valid conclusion that we can not be in a special place in the universe such as the center. So the invented an explanation for the evidence is to eliminate the center by making all locations seem to be at the center. If we were created by God then we could easily be near the center of the universe. This is why Creationists and Evolutionists can look at the same evidence and draw totally different conclusions.

Deductive reasoning is a very useful tool of reasoning however it does have its difficulties. It depends heavily on the accuracy its starting premises. However flawed premises result in flawed conclusions. These difficulties need to be properly understood to properly understand scientific statements including those of both Creationists and Evolutionists.

Logic it’s Reasonable

Logic is the set of principles and rules for reasoning. When used correctly and given the right starting point one will arrive at the correct conclusion.

 Deductive reasoning is reasoning that starts with a given set premises and draws a conclusion. Inductivereasoning is reasoning that draws a general conclusion based on a set of examples. So deductive reasoning goes from general principles to specific conclusions. Inductive reasoning goes from specific principles to general conclusions. Both forms of logic are used in science.

 Deductive and Inductive reasoning are different and even opposite concepts but in practice deductive and inductive reasoning are often used together even without knowing it.  For example one may be drawing a general conclusion form observed evidence (induction) based on general principles called assumptions. (deduction)

Logical fallacies are mistakes in reasoning and can be both deliberate and accidental. It is important to avoid them since they resultant in erroneous conclusions.