Logical arguments use inductive or deductive reasoning to determine truth or validity. Inductive reasoning uses observation to support a conclusion, while deductive reasoning uses established rules or laws. Both require different types of support, and deductive arguments are valid or invalid, not true or false.
Logical arguments follow a particular course of reasoning with the goal of determining whether something is true or false, valid or valid. Some logical argument styles use inductive reasoning and others use deductive reasoning. Types of inductive reasoning in logical argument include generalization, false analogy, random inference, and prediction. Deductive reasoning bases its soundness or validity on the accuracy of the initial premise. All logical arguments have a premise and a conclusion, and derive their conclusions from the truthfulness of the premise or from the amount of accurate information contained in the premise.
Every logical argument can be classified using inductive reasoning or deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning typically moves from specific to general by using single events, incidents, or generalizations to support an argument and arrive at a conclusion. An example of inductive logic is observing that all spiders that have been observed by a person are aggressive, therefore all spiders are aggressive. This type of logic has been criticized for its apparent weaknesses in drawing conclusions based on the observer’s limited experience or the amount of truth contained in the premise. In a mathematical logic argument, the strongest induction is used to show that gravity has an expected effect on moving objects based on simple observation. These observable and demonstrable conclusions about gravity, while seemingly absolute, are not accurate when those same moving objects approach the speed of light.
The inductive reasoning used in logical argument states that a man can notice through observation that when he throws a stone in the air, it falls to the ground. If he throws another stone, it will probably fall to the ground as well. The deductive reasoning used in logical argument is based on the premise of a known and proven fact or a law of gravity that when a stone goes up, it will come down every time. The difference is in how each type of argument is expressed. Inductive reasoning is supported by man’s observation of the events around him. Deductive reasoning is supported by a stated fact or a law of physics.
Both inductive and deductive require different types of support. In the example above, the first man’s inductive reasoning is supported by what he sees and can be further supported by what he sees every time he throws a stone, even though he never realizes Newton’s law of gravity . The man who uses deductive reasoning to support his logical argument is based on the known and demonstrable law of gravity and his conclusion is supported by the laws of physics, even though he never throws a stone. While inductive reasoning is based on inference and generalization based on what is observed, deductive reasoning bases the conclusion on the truthfulness of the initial premise. A logical argument using deductive reasoning is never true or false. Rather, it is valid or invalid.
Inductive reasoning typically reaches a conclusion based on experience or observation while deductive reasoning reaches a conclusion based on established rules, laws, or other facts or principles. Deductive reasoning starts with the general and moves towards a specific conclusion. An argument using deductive reasoning is never true or false, rather it is valid or invalid.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
