Posted Nov. 29, 2013 by mrmathew1963 in Open

commented on Nov. 30, 2013
by mrmathew1963



The following definitions show why our reasoning processes are so different, it’s not just to do with our beliefs/concepts but how we reason within these beliefs/concepts. Both inductive & deductive reasoning have their place within humanity as they both serve a purpose however they can be seen in opposition to each other usually depending on the belief or concept involved.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

INDUCTIVE REASONING (as opposed to deductive reasoning) is reasoning in which the premises seek to supply strong evidence for (not absolute proof of) the truth of the conclusion. While the conclusion of a deductive argument is supposed to be certain, the truth of an inductive argument is supposed to be probable, based upon the evidence given.[1]

DEDUCTIVE REASONING, also deductive logic or logical deduction or, informally, "top-down" logic,[1] is the process of reasoning from one or more general statements (premises) to reach a logically certain conclusion.[2]

Inductive reasoning to me is more to do with what science at any given time is unable to prove or give an answer too however deductive reasoning is supposed to be more precise within its evaluative deductions. The problem I see with deductive reasoning is it will only look into things it can measure where inductive reasoning will also look beyond what it can measure at any given time. Inductive reasoning makes more logical sense because it evaluates through both reasoning processes depending on the belief/concept involved of course.

If anyone wants to add to this or pick holes in this please feel free however I would like to ask Dusty to refrain from replying please, show a little respect of other people’s wishes Dusty.

  • mrmathew1963 Nov 30, 2013

    G'day Dusty

    I asked you nicely not to reply because it seems everything you reply to ends up in a shemozzle, it’s obvious you are not going to respect anyone’s wishes or pleas, you certainly don’t respect anyone who uses inductive reasoning .

    You must ask yourself why so many spiritually aware people who use inductive reasoning to reason are attracted to this site in the first place!!

    It’s obvious you’re not showing or going to show anyone on here respect in anyway so the only recourse I have left is to ignore you sadly enough, respect begets respect

  • Anonymous Icon

    dustproduction Nov 30, 2013

    Deductive reasoning links premises with conclusions. If all premises are true, the terms are clear, and the rules of deductive logic are followed, then the conclusion reached is necessarily true.
    Deductive reasoning (top-down logic) contrasts with inductive reasoning (bottom-up logic) in the following way: In deductive reasoning, a conclusion is reached reductively by applying general rules that hold over the entirety of a closed domain of discourse, narrowing the range under consideration until only the conclusion is left. In inductive reasoning, the conclusion is reached by generalizing or extrapolating from initial information (and so induction can be used even in an open domain, one where there is epistemic uncertainty. (Note, however, that the inductive reasoning mentioned here is not the same as induction used in mathematical proofs - mathematical induction is actually a form of deductive reasoning.)
    Also see, Law of detachment, Law of syllogism, Law of contrapositive.

    (This is not a comment, just clarification)

Stay in touch with IONS