Can inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning make a comelling argument by themselves?
Please type your subject in the School Subject box. Any other words are likely to delay responses from a teacher who knows that subject well.
Not usually. Compelling arguments often add some emotion to the issue. Examples: Marriage, medical marijuana, abortion, "family" values.
Yes, both inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning can make compelling arguments on their own, depending on the context and the strength of the reasoning.
Inductive reasoning is a type of reasoning that uses specific observations or evidence to reach a general conclusion. It involves making generalizations or predictions based on patterns observed in a limited set of instances. For example, if you observe that all the crows you have seen are black, you might induce that all crows are black. Inductive reasoning can be persuasive when there is a large amount of supporting evidence and a strong correlation between the observed instances and the conclusion.
On the other hand, deductive reasoning is a type of reasoning that uses general known principles or premises to reach a specific conclusion. It involves drawing logical inferences by applying general rules to specific cases. For example, if you know that all mammals have fur and dogs are mammals, you can deduce that dogs have fur. Deductive reasoning can be convincing when the premises are true and the logical structure of the argument is valid.
However, it's important to note that while both types of reasoning can be persuasive individually, using a combination of inductive and deductive reasoning can often result in stronger arguments. Inductive reasoning can generate hypotheses or generalizations that can then be tested using deductive reasoning, which can provide more rigorous proof or confirmation.