The Difference Between Inductive And Deductive Reasoning. How Are Issues Of Validity And Truth Distinguished - Essay Example

? What is the difference between inductive and deductive reasoning? How do you distinguish between issues of validity and truth? Table of Contents Inductive and Deductive Reasoning 3 Distinction between validity and truth 4 References 7 Inductive and Deductive Reasoning Inductive reasoning is a type of logic in which the general rule or propositions are derived from specific examples. The examples are individual or specific instances that are evaluated and the findings obtained from the specific examples are accumulated to form a general rule. The inductive reasoning is intuitive and majorly a result of guesswork. For this reason, inductive reasoning is said to be probabilistic (Hacking, 2001, p.38). The conclusions obtained from the specific examples are analysed to form a general proposition that is a probabilistic one. The general rule that is formed as a result of inductive is subject to test and the outcome of those tests could not be guaranteed. The concept of inductive reasoning was developed by the Scottish philosopher David Hume. Hume stated that the daily habits of human beings are the reflection of the uncertain conclusions that are derived from the limited experiences (Dewey, 2008, p.47). Thus the general principles developed are not tested and derived but are the outcome of specific events in life. This is where inductive reasoning is significant. There is no scope of drawing logical conclusions that could be guaranteed through inductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning could be termed as bottom-up reasoning. For example, a woman leaves her home at 9’o clock in the morning and reaches office in time. From this specific incident, the woman would form a general proposition that if she leaves her home everyday at 9’o clock in the morning, then she would always reach her office in time (Feeney and Heit, 2007, p.56). Deductive reasoning, on the other hand is just opposite to inductive reasoning. The process of deductive reasoning follows the top-down approach of logical argument. Deductive reasoning is the process of logical deduction by considering the general rules and propositions to reach a logical conclusion. The process of deductive reasoning produces definite conclusion which could be considered to be universally true provided the applied logical steps followed for the purpose of deduction are appropriate. Deductive reasoning links the premises to the derived conclusions. The conclusions drawn from the general principles through deductive reasoning could be validated by specific examples. The conclusions derived from the general propositions are true for any individual event that is an application of the general rule (Descartes, 2006, p.26). The laws of syllogism provide one form of logical reasoning that helps in the logical deduction of conclusions from the general statements or propositions. The general statements being given, a hypothesis is designed which is tested in order to reach a logical conclusion. There are two other laws, namely the law of detachment and the law of contra-positive that are used in the process of deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning could be explained with the help of the following example. The general propositions considered in this case are: All tables are chairs and some tables are fans. From the given two statements, it could be deduced logically that some chairs are fans. This conclusion has been deducted with the help of the given two statements and applying the laws of syllogism. Thus a specific instance has been drawn though deductive reasoning from the two general statements (Bacon, 2009, p.67). Distinction between validity and truth The process of deductive reasoning considers the general propositions and designs a hypothesis in order to logically deduce a conclusion. The conclusion drawn from the general statements are valid logically and are considered to be true. The premises or the general propositions are considered to be true for the purpose of logical deduction. The hypothesis is for the purpose for the logical deduction of the conclusion from the general statements that are considered. However, there is a distinction between the validity and truth of the logical conclusion drawn through the process of deductive reasoning. Deductive reasoning includes the process of starting off with a valid set of premises that are considered to be logically valid. The next steps include the preparation of a hypothesis that is tested to form a conclusion that is logically valid. This conclusion which is logically valid may not be true in real life. Thus the conclusions which are valid may not be the truth when common sense is applied. The conclusions are derived using the laws of reasoning and scientific approach to test the hypothesis that is framed from the general proposition (Schaeken, 2000, p.93). This conclusion, although valid, may not represent truth in real life. This distinction between the validity and truth of the derived conclusions are likely to occur when the premises considered for the purpose of deductive reasoning are valid but not true. This could be explained with the help of two examples. Let us consider the two general statements: All warriors are brave and Alexander, the Great is a warrior. Applying deductive reasoning, the conclusion that could be logically derived is that Alexander, the Great is brave. This conclusion that has been deduced with the help of deductive reasoning is logically valid according to the rule of reasoning and also resembles the truth. Another example would help in understanding the distinction between the validity and truth in this context. Considering the two general statements which states that all women are immortal and Elizabeth is a woman. Applying deductive ways of reasoning on the above two general statements, it could be logically concluded that Elizabeth is immortal. Looking at the laws of reasoning and the process of deductive logic, it could be said that the conclusion is perfectly valid from the logical point of view. However, the conclusion does not reflect the truth although there is no question about its validity. This shows that there is a clear distinction between validity and truth in the context of reasoning. In deductive reasoning, if a general statement is true for a certain class of living or non-living beings, then the conclusion is said to be true for the same class of living and non-living beings (Bickenbach and Davies, 1996, p.19). Looking at the examples given above, it would be rather appropriate to say that the conclusions are logically true since the conclusion are derived on the basis of deductive logic and not on the basis of practical experience as in inductive reasoning. References Bacon, F. 2009. Bacon's Novum Organum. BiblioBazaar; USA. Bickenbach, J. E. and Davies, J. M. 1996. Good Reasons for Better Arguments: An Introduction to the Skills and Values of Critical Thinking. Broadview Press; Canada. Descartes, R. 2006. Meditations of First Philosophy. ReadHowYouWant.com; USA. Dewey, J. 2008. How We Think. Cosimo Inc; New York. Feeney, A. and Heit, E. 2007. Inductive Reasoning: Experimental, Developmental, and Computational Approaches. Cambridge University Press: New York. Hacking, I. 2001. An introduction to probability and inductive logic. Cambridge University Press; USA. Schaeken, W. 2000. Destructive Reasoning and Strategies. Routledge; New Jersey. Read More