What is the distinction between deductive and inductive arguments? Give an example of each to make your explanation clearer.
http://www.google.com/search?q=deductive+inductive+argument&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
This is like logical or critical reasoning, so let us conduct ourselves rationally. A deductive(or valid) argument is one which the conclusion absolutely has to be true given the premises. An inductive argument in one in which the concusion is more likely than not to be supported by the premises.
The distinction between deductive and inductive arguments lies in their structure and the way they are used to infer conclusions or make predictions based on available information.
Deductive reasoning is a type of argument that seeks to reach a logically certain conclusion based on one or more premises. In other words, if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true. Deductive arguments can be represented in the form of syllogisms or categorical propositions.
Example of a deductive argument:
1. All men are mortal.
2. Socrates is a man.
Therefore, Socrates is mortal.
In this example, the conclusion that Socrates is mortal is reached by applying the general principle that all men are mortal to the specific case of Socrates.
Inductive reasoning, on the other hand, involves making generalizations or predictions based on observed patterns or specific examples. It does not guarantee certainty, but it provides a degree of probability or likelihood. Inductive arguments gather evidence or data, and then use that evidence to support a conclusion that is likely to be true but not necessarily definitive.
Example of an inductive argument:
1. Every cat I have seen has a tail.
2. Therefore, all cats have tails.
In this example, the conclusion that all cats have tails is based on a pattern observed in multiple instances. While it may be highly likely that all cats have tails, there is still a slight possibility that an exception exists.
To summarize, deductive arguments aim to guarantee the truth of the conclusion based on the truth of the premises, whereas inductive arguments seek to provide evidence or support for a conclusion that is likely to be true based on observed patterns or specific examples.