Logic Module 6
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Butler Community College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
101
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by PresidentTreeMandrill34
Inductive reasoning is much less black and white than deductive, but has a few distinct advantages, making it very appealing. Inductive reasoning is the form of argument that bases its final conclusion on several factors and ideas. According to the book Understanding Arguments
by Walter Sinnot-Armstrong and Robert Fogelin, Inductive reasoning is the argument form that is “intended to be strong rather than valid.” (Page #179) It differs from deductive reasoning because unlike inductive, deductive reasoning has one strong premise which is the metaphorical nail upon which the entire argument hangs or relies on. If for whatever reason this premise is proved to be incorrect, all further arguments and conclusions based on it are considered invalid. This is precisely where the strength of inductive reasoning comes into play. Inductive reasoning is favorable in that when one of its premises are proven incorrect or irrelevant, the argument may
still stand on other factors and arguments, whereas deductive reasoning would be utterly destroyed as everything is based on one critical idea. This, however, can be a blessing as well as a curse as if the premise is true, then the conclusion MUST be true in deductive reasoning, while inductive reasoning is only used to prove an argument to be strong, all the while having room for
discrepancy. These strengths and weaknesses are exhibited in the inductive modes of generalization, explanation, and analogy as there is definitely room for error and improvement in
a generalized argument, as the argument may be weak with a weak premise or entirely unrelated if the generalization is hasty. Explanation can be strong in that it makes the explanation of an argument the proof of the argument’s truth, however it is weak in that it is merely a hypothesis, with no grounded proof other than that it fits the created narrative. Analogy, likewise, has strengths in that if “two things have certain features in common it is taken as evidence that they have further features in common” (Page #195), thereby building a stronger and more grounded argument, but it is weak as just because there are some similarities, there is no guarantee that
everything or even anything else is the same. In the end, when using inductive reasoning there are many factors to consider, as it can be a great tool in an argument with its ability to combine several factors as the premise but can also provide a false narrative if presented without substantial correlation between arguments and ideas.
Works Cited
Sinnott Armstrong, Walter, and Robert Fogelin. Understanding Arguments. 9th ed., Boston, MA, Cengage Learning, 2015
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help