Logic, Science, and Ethics - Essay Example

Inductive reasoning is probabilistic; in other words, it does not say that the hypothesis is surely valid but is probable. In testing the hypothesis using inductive reasoning, one can say: All Asians are intelligent in Mathematics. John is Asian. Therefore, the probability that John is intelligent in Math is 100% or certain. On the contrary, in testing the hypothesis using deductive reasoning, one can say: All Asians are intelligent in Mathematics. John is Asian. Therefore, John is intelligent in Mathematics. It can be observed that the difference between the two reasoning can be defined by its falsifiability. Inductive reasoning permits the possibility that the conclusion of the proposed premises can be incorrect in that it is only a probability and could be disproved by solid evidence in the future. Deductive reasoning, on contrary, does not only rely on the soundness of the proposition but also on its validity. When a hypothesis is valid, it is impossible for it to have a false conclusion. It could lack soundness but it will retain its validity. That is why, Karl Popper’s strategy of disconfirmation is better in the sense that it considers hypothesis according to its falsifiability – a quality that every hypothesis is testable and that if something is wrong among and within its premise, it will manifest itself eventually.  
2. The condition clearly involves a conflict of interest as well as an ethical dilemma: there is a clear ambivalence on the part of Mary on whether to steal or not; to be altruistic or egoistic. One should remember that there is no justification for stealing. Stealing is morally wrong; nevertheless, to die because of starvation is likewise wrong. Hence, a conflict of interest arises.