Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Inductive reasoning is any of various methods of reasoning in which broad generalizations or principles are derived from a body of observations. [1] [2] This article is concerned with the inductive reasoning other than deductive reasoning (such as mathematical induction), where the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain given the premises are correct; in contrast, the truth of the ...
Deduction and induction may refer to: Deductive reasoning; Inductive reasoning; Validity (logic) Cogency (disambiguation) This page was last edited on ...
While deductive logic allows one to arrive at a conclusion with certainty, inductive logic can only provide a conclusion that is probably true. [non-primary source needed] It is mistaken to frame the difference between deductive and inductive logic as one between general to specific reasoning and specific to general reasoning. This is a common ...
Deductive reasoning can be contrasted with inductive reasoning, in regards to validity and soundness. In cases of inductive reasoning, even though the premises are true and the argument is “valid”, it is possible for the conclusion to be false (determined to be false with a counterexample or other means).
Inference is theoretically traditionally divided into deduction and induction, a distinction that in Europe dates at least to Aristotle (300s BCE). Deduction is inference deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true , with the laws of valid inference being studied in logic .
In a slightly weaker form, induction can also be used to infer an individual conclusion about a single case, for example, that "the next raven I will see is black". [69] [1] Inductive reasoning is closely related to statistical reasoning and probabilistic reasoning. [72] Like other forms of non-deductive reasoning, induction is not certain.
Induction, for Bacon's followers, meant a type of rigour applied to factual matters. Reasoning should not be applied in plain fashion to just any collection of examples, an approach identified as "Plinian". In considering natural facts, a fuller survey was required to form a basis for going further. [6]
In this way, it contrasts with deductive reasoning examined by formal logic. [35] Non-deductive arguments make their conclusion probable but do not ensure that it is true. An example is the inductive argument from the empirical observation that "all ravens I have seen so far are black" to the conclusion "all ravens are black". [36]