...The Difference of Deductive and Inductive Arguments of Mislead Reasoning LaQuisha Johnson Basic Critical Thinking Instructor: Krista Bridgmon Everest University The Difference of Deductive and Inductive Arguments of Misleading Reasoning Identify the differences between deductive and inductive arguments. The differences between that of deductive and that of inductive arguments is; that inductive reasoning is an argument form in which one of the reasons from premises that have been known or assumed to be true to a conclusion to which it was supported by the premises, however doesn’t follow logically from them (Chaffee, 2012/2009 p.456). See with reasoning inductively, your premises can provide the evidence that can make it more or less probable but isn’t certain that the conclusion is even true. For an example statements in the textbook one being a recent Gallup Poll that was reported that 74 percent of American public believed that abortion should remain legalized. Another inductive argument from the textbook is that on the average states that a person who has a college degree will earn over $1,000,000 more in that of their lifetime than that of a person who only has a high school Diploma. A third example of an inductive in the textbook states that in a recent survey that there was twice as many doctors that where interviewed that had stated that if they had been stranded on a desert island that they would choose Bayer Aspirin then to that of Extra Strength Tylenol...
Words: 774 - Pages: 4
...uring the scientific process, deductive reasoning is used to reach a logical true conclusion. Another type of reasoning, inductive, is also used. Often, deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning are confused. It is important to learn the meaning of each type of reasoning so that proper logic can be identified. Deductive reasoning Deductive reasoning is a basic form of valid reasoning. Deductive reasoning, or deduction, starts out with a general statement, or hypothesis, and examines the possibilities to reach a specific, logical conclusion, according to the University of California. The scientific method uses deduction to test hypotheses and theories. "In deductive inference, we hold a theory and based on it we make a prediction of its consequences. That is, we predict what the observations should be if the theory were correct. We go from the general — the theory — to the specific — the observations," said Dr. Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller, a researcher and professor emerita at Albert Einstein College of Medicine. uring the scientific process, deductive reasoning is used to reach a logical true conclusion. Another type of reasoning, inductive, is also used. Often, deductive reasoning and inductive reasoning are confused. It is important to learn the meaning of each type of reasoning so that proper logic can be identified. Deductive reasoning Deductive reasoning is a basic form of valid reasoning. Deductive reasoning, or deduction, starts out with a general statement, or hypothesis...
Words: 1107 - Pages: 5
...Deductive reasoning Deductive reasoning is reasoning from the general to the particular (or from cause to effect) (Deductive reasoning, 2010). Inductive reasoning is or induction, is reasoning from a specific case or cases and deriving a general rule. It draws inferences from observations in order to make generalizations. Being able to reason and identify one’s own and other’s delusions is the center of critical thinking. The two methods of reasoning are deductive and inductive. An example of deductive thinking is all rectangles are squares. All squares have four sides. In deductive reasoning, logical thinking leads to conclusions. In inductive reasoning, conclusions are drawn because of evidence that is often used to categorize the same people in that group. An example of inductive reasoning is all birds that have been seen are black. Therefore, all birds are black. Critical thinking in the workplace daily and is also very important. If one’s workplace is changing structure, all styles of thinking will come into play. For example, democrats have held the seats of the legislature for more than a decade. In January 2011, republicans will take over the seats of the legislature. Thinking styles on both sides are much different and will come into play. The creative thinking styles come into play by brainstorming the types of legislation that republicans will want to pass. Republicans will wonder how to persuade other members to vote for their legislation. Republicans...
Words: 394 - Pages: 2
...Perspective - Reasoning Epistemological Perspective Knowledge Metaphysical Perspective Reality Reasoning Reasoning is a special kind of thinking in which problems are solved, in which inference takes place, that is, in which conclusions are drawn from premises. The logician is concerned primarily with the correctness of the completed process of reasoning. Nature of Reasoning Typically, a piece of reasoning moves from one or more statements which are, at least provisionally, taken for granted to some other statement. A statement means what is typically asserted using a declarative sentence, and hence always either true or false – although its truth or falsity may be unknown. The starting points of reasoning are called the premises, the end-point the conclusion. A set of statements consisting of some premises and a conclusion is called an argument. Examples of arguments: First: All rich people are happy and Hitesh is rich, therefore, Hitesh is happy. Second: The potatoes have been boiling for twenty minutes, therefore, they are cooked! A logical perspective begins in response to questions such as the following: Is this argument based on reason or experience? Is this argument correct (rationally defensible)? Does this argument preserve or lead to truth? Arguments are traditionally divided into two different types, deductive and inductive. Deductive Argument A deductive argument is valid...
Words: 663 - Pages: 3
...will be happy. This is an example of inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning, or induction, is reasoning from a specific case or cases and deriving a general rule. It draws inferences from observations in order to make generalizations. (Inductive) Another example we follow with inductive reasoning is that if I go to bed at 8 tonight I will be well rested: Therefore I will be well rested every night if I go to bed at 8. This logic is fallible because some nights I may wake up in the middle of the night and others I may sleep throughout. Another example I use a lot with inductive thinking pertains to World of Warcraft. Player A has awesome stats on his gear. Better gear with higher stats mean better players. Therefore Player A is an awesome player. With that assumption one does not simply know. Deductive reasoning is basing decisions from more fact then generalization. For example, if I do not eat, I will be hungry. Therefore I must eat to not be hungry. Another good example of deductive reasoning used on a daily base is I dirty dishes when I eat. The dishes will pile up in the sink. Therefore I will have a sink full of dishes when I eat. This is also partly false because sometimes one does not use the same amount of dishes. The body uses deductive reasoning on its own. One does not simply think to oneself I must breathe right now. It is a built in mechanism that the brain has learned through logic. Other example of deductive reasoning is I want to make more money....
Words: 496 - Pages: 2
...Globalization Argumentative Paper Jamie Mallard PHL/320 January 18, 2016 Lisa Siegal Globalization Argumentative Paper Globalization is a process of interaction and integration among the people, companies, and governments of different nations, a process driven by international trade and investment and aided by information technology. This process has effects on the environment, on culture, on political systems, on economic development and prosperity, and on human physical well-being in societies around the world. (The Levin Institute: Globalization101, para. 1) According to Merriam-Webster (2015), a definition of good is “a favorable character or tendency, or profitable or advantageous.” In using the definition profitable or advantageous, (1, Conclusion) globalization is good for business. (1, Premise) Globalization allows for companies to have their products made for a much lower cost and in turn pass those savings on to consumers. (1, Premise) Globalization also allows for foreign aid and has moved many countries out of abject poverty and into a middle class standard of living, according to Meredith and Hoppough (2007). (2, Conclusion) Globalization is also good for international relations and trade. (2, Premise) Globalization can bring different cultures to different nations. Thankfully, through the developments and technology, borders have been erased and products and services can now move globally more easily. (2, Premise) Different regions of the world...
Words: 716 - Pages: 3
...Week & Assignment- Differentiating Reasoning Breah Lynch CRT/205 November 25, 2012 Susan Tutan-Gonzales Week & Assignment- Differentiating Reasoning Re-evaluate the articles you examined from the Opposing Viewpoint Resource Center in the University Library in Week Two. Address the following issues in a 250- to 350-word response for each article: • Discuss whether the author used deductive argument or inductive reasoning. • Identify the deductive argument, or some of the supporting information for the inductive reasoning. • Explain your answer using the course materials to support your findings. Article 1: “Biofuels Are Not a Viable Renewable Energy” Written by: Danny Chivers In this essay the author attempts to prove that biofuels are not a viable renewable energy source. He uses facts that are both relevant and sound to prove his conclusion. He gave many examples of how biofuels could be used locally, but that on a global scale it would be pointless, and potentially more harmful. I believe that the author is using a deductive argument to prove his argument, because he uses many facts, such as the statistics from reports and research that has been done, and he gives sufficient evidence to support his deduction. He gives several reasons that biofuels are not a viable renewable energy source, such as: the potential danger it would put on food stores and food crop prices, the indirect emissions resulting from destroying peat land or rainforest to build...
Words: 675 - Pages: 3
...Eight Elements of Thought and Reasoning The Eight Elements of Thought and the Eight Elements of reasoning both have eight parts, but there are only four real distinct categories. For example, Point of View and Assumptions are two aspects of the same thing. Re-organize the eight elements of thought and reasoning into four categories. Briefly describe each category. Include the characteristics of the original eight elements in your descriptions. The four real distinct categories are deductive, inductive, abductive or inference, and analogical. Deductive Reasoning: Consist of Implication and Consequences, and Interpretation and Inference. Deductive reasoning is one of the two basic forms of valid reasoning. It starts with an assumed hypothesis or theory, which is why it has been called 'hypothetical-deduction; this assumption may be well-accepted or it may be rather precarious - nevertheless, for the argument it is not questioned. This is the opposite of inductive reasoning, which involves creating broad generalizations from specific observations. The basic idea of deductive reasoning is that if something is true of a class of things in general, this truth applies to all members of that class. One of the keys for sound deductive reasoning, then, is to be able to properly identify members of the class, because incorrect categorizations will result in unsound conclusions. Inferences are interpretations or conclusions you come to. Inferring is what the mind does in figuring...
Words: 452 - Pages: 2
...As the book suggests, Piaget final stage of cognitive development starts at an age of eleven and continues throughout adulthood. At this stage, an individual who was able to reach this stage successfully had successfully been able to think abstractly, this is usually achieved by developing both inductive and deductive reasoning. Thus, for the purpose of acing my MCAT exam, I worked on both inductive and deductive reasoning skills. I developed my deductive reasoning skills through analyzing, breaking down each question, set a general rule and then draw a conclusion from the information provided. Deductive reasoning was a helpful process to deduce the most possible solution or multiple choices based on the information given in each...
Words: 544 - Pages: 3
...Running Head: Eight Elements of Thought and Reasoning Yehuwdah Yodhhewawhe Eight Elements of Thought and Reasoning G00099693 HU260 Strategies for Decision Making November 10, 2013 Eight Elements of Thought and Reasoning The purpose of this assignment to expound on four real distinct categories of reasoning which consist of deductive, inductive, adductive or inference, and analogical. The first category of reasoning involves deductive reasoning which consist of consist of implication and consequences, and interpretation and inference. Deductive reasoning is one of the two basic forms of valid reasoning; it commences with an assumed hypothesis or theory, which is why it has been called 'hypothetical-deduction; this assumption may be well-accepted or it may be rather precarious - nevertheless, for the argument it is not questioned. The basic idea of deductive reasoning is that if something is true of a class of things in general, this truth applies to all members of that class. One of the keys for sound deductive reasoning, then, is to be able to properly identify members of the class, because incorrect categorizations will result in unsound conclusions. Moreover, inferences are interpretations or conclusions that you come to. Inferring is what the intellect does in attempting to figure something out. Implications are claims or truths that reasonably follow from other claims or truths. On the other hand, implications follow from ideas, and consequences follow...
Words: 479 - Pages: 2
...Study Guide: Lesson 4 A Little Logic Lesson Overview Logic is the primary tool or methodology in studying philosophy. Philosophy is about analyzing and constructing arguments and a good understanding of the basics of logical reasoning is essential in performing that task. The next 3 lessons will focus on logic and analyzing arguments. In this lesson, you will first be introduced to the laws of logic. These are the first principles for all reasoning. We will then discuss the specialized terminology we use in logic. Finally, we will examine 2 major kinds of logical reasoning: deductive and inductive. We will consider different forms of arguments under each and discuss how to evaluate these arguments. Take note that a large part of this lesson is about learning the terminology for logic. Tasks Read and take notes from chapter 5 of Philosophy: Critically Thinking about Foundational Beliefs, “A Little Logic.” As you read, make sure you understand the following points and questions: * Why are the laws of logic foundational? * The Law of Logic makes discourse possible. If they are not recognized as true, than nothing we claim makes any sense. Therefore, it is important to have a firm grasp of these laws. * List and explain the 3 laws of logic. 1. Noncontradiction – “Something cannot both be and not be at the same time and in the same respect. Expressed symbolically: ~ (P•~P).² It reads, “It is not the case that there can be both P and non-P”. 2....
Words: 1412 - Pages: 6
...THE TYPES OF ARGUMENTS Normally we classify all arguments into one of two types: deductive and inductive. Deductive arguments are those meant to work because of their pattern alone, so that if the premises are true the conclusion could not be false. All other arguments are considered to be inductive (or just non-deductive), and these are meant to work because of the actual information in the premises so that if the premises are true the conclusion is not likely to be false. The difference is between certainty (we can be sure the conclusion is correct) and probability (we can bet on the conclusion being correct). We now go one step further. A deductive argument with the right form is considered to be valid, regardless of the truth of the premises. When the premises are in fact true and the argument is valid, then we call it sound. Inductive arguments can be seen as strong (the conclusion is more likely to be true because of support provided by the premises) or as weak. When an inductively strong argument does have true premises, we call it cogent. How strong does an argument have to be to be acceptable? A good rule to start with is that the more is at risk, the more likely you want the conclusion to be correct. For instance, in a civil case (the kind that occurs when one person sues another) a jury is asked to decide between two sides based simply on the preponderance of the evidence, and typically there can be a split decision among the jurors. However,...
Words: 771 - Pages: 4
...philosophy arguing their views. Dating back to 200 AD, Sextus Empiricus was one of the first skeptics on induction and questioned whether induction is a valid form of scientific reasoning. Almost two thousands years later the debate still continues, however along the way many philosophers, most notably David Hume, have made major contribution to “the problem of induction debate”. Inductive reasoning has been commonly used for explanation, however problems associated with inductive reason make a case for it to be misleading and a questionable form of reasoning. In this paper I will argue that a logical response...
Words: 1659 - Pages: 7
...Social structure is defined as any relatively stable pattern of social behavior. The structural-functional paradigm points to social structure promoting the operation of society as a whole, while the social-conflict paradigm points out how social patterns benefit some people but deprive others. How is reliability different from validity? Which term implies the other? 10/3.33 Reliability refers to consistency in measurement, while validity means precision in measuring exactly what one intends to measure. Validity implies reliability. How does inductive logical thought differ from deductive logical thought? How can a researcher benefit from using both kinds of thinking? 17 Inductive logical thought is reasoning that transforms specific observations into general theory. Deductive logical thought is reasoning that transforms general theory into specific hypotheses suitable for testing. The strengths of inductive logical thought lies in establishing probability and being flexible by providing direction to evaluate competing hypotheses, even when information...
Words: 360 - Pages: 2
...Deductive and Inductive Criminal Profiling In when interpreting the personal and behavioral characteristic to identify a suspect of a crime, two primary forms of logic can be using in conducting an investigation: inductive and deductive. Inductions consists of generalizations or assumptions that are formed based on what has been observed. Inductions, like predictions, may not always be accurate. Profilers who develop their logic base off of experience or observation without any provable or verifiable science based theories, ultimately allow bias conclusions to form. On the contrary, deductive profiling is an evidence-based, process-oriented method of investigative reasoning based off of the behavioral patterns of a particular offender...
Words: 482 - Pages: 2
