0
because it makes assumptions based on supported ideas
Wiki User
∙ 8y ago
Xavier Arndt
because it makes assumptions based on supported ideas -Apex
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why is inductive reasoning stronger than deductive reasoning?
because it makes assumptions based on supported ideas
Deductive reasoning is stronger than inductive reasoning because it?
draws conclusions based on premises everyone can agree on
Inductive reasoning is weaker than deductive reasoning because it?
Inductive reasoning is weaker than deductive reasoning because inductive reasoning is known as bottom-up logic where as deductive reasoning is known as top-down logic.
What is the difference between deductive and subjective reasoning?
the difference between deductive and subjective reasoning is that deductive reasoning is a logical process in which a conclusion drawn from a set of premises contains no more information than the premises taken collectively. While subjective reasoning is drawn from past experience.
What is it that makes an argument inductive?
An argument is inductive if its premises provide evidence that supports the conclusion but does not guarantee its truth. Inductive reasoning involves making generalizations based on specific observations or evidence. The strength of an inductive argument depends on the quality and relevance of the evidence provided.
Why is inductive reasoning stronger than deductive reasoning?
because it makes assumptions based on supported ideas
Inductive reasoning is weaker than deductive reasoning because?
Inductive reasoning is weaker than deductive reasoning because inductive reasoning is known as bottom-up logic where as deductive reasoning is known as top-down logic.
Deductive reasoning is stronger than inductive reasoning because it?
draws conclusions based on premises everyone can agree on
Inductive reasoning is weaker than deductive reasoning because it?
Inductive reasoning is weaker than deductive reasoning because inductive reasoning is known as bottom-up logic where as deductive reasoning is known as top-down logic.
What is inductive and deductive reasoning?
Inductive reasoning moves from the general details to the specific details Deductive reasoning is reasoning from the specific details to the general details
True or false Deductive reasoning is much better than inductive reasoning?
FALSE
What is a conclusion reached through inductive reasoning?
Deductive reasoning goes from a general to a specific instance. For example, if we say all primes other than two are odd, deductive reasoning would let us say that 210000212343848212 is not prime. Here is a more "classic"example of deductive reasoning. All apples are fruits All fruits grow on trees Therefore, all apples grow on trees
Is deductive reasoning more important than inductive reasoning?
Both are equally important. Inductive reasoning is when one makes a conclusion based on patterns; deductive reasoning is based on a hypothesis already believed to be true. However, deductive reasoning does give a more "solid" conclusion because as long as the hypothesis is true, the conclusion will most likely to be true. An example is saying that all dogs are big; Harry is a dog, so it must be big. Since the hypothesis all dogs are big is false, Harry may not necessarily be big. If I change my hypothesis to be all dogs are mammals, thus concluding that Harry is a mammal since it is a dog, I would be correct, for I changed my hypothesis to a true fact. Using inductive reasoning, on the other hand, may result in a false conclusion. For example, since I am a human and I have brown hair, one could use inductive reasoning to say all humans have brown hair, which would be false. So, to sum it up, both inductive and deductive reasoning are important, but deductive reasoning is usually more reliable since as long as the hypothesis one's conclusion is based on is true, the conclusion itself will usually be true.
What is the similarities between inductive and deductive?
Deductive reasoning is a logical process in which a conclusion is drawn from a set of conclusions that contain no more information than is already available. This conclusion is logically true. . Inductive reasoning is a logical process in which a conclusion is proposed when it contains more information than the observations or experiences on which the conclusion is based. The terms of the conclusion is verifiable only in terms of future experience. For example, there is no certainty that a white crow will be found tomorrow, although past experience will make the occurance unlikely
Examples of deductive logic?
This is a concept made more complex than necessary. The two complementary processes of inductive vs. deductive are very simply and easily understood. Consider the number series; 3, 5, 7, 'x', 11, 13, 15, 'y' Simple inspection shows this to be a series of 'odd' numbers, what a mathematician would call 'n+1'. Inductive vs. deductive simply describes the 'type' of reasoning used to determine either 'x' or 'y'. Because it lies 'inside' the other data points, the 'deduction' that 'x'=9 is reached by deductive logic, or, deductive reasoning. We 'deduce' x=9. 'y', on the other hand, lies 'outside' the data, i.e. we don't have a '19' on the 'right' of the 'y' to help us 'deduce' the answer. Much riskier than deductive logic/reasoning, we are forced to use less evidence than we did for the 'x' case. This method is called 'inductive logic/reasoning'. For those who've been exposed to just a little math, this process might seem similar to the dual processes of interpolation and extrapolation...that's because...they are. Identical. Smile, nod and thank those who try to convince you there's 'more to it than THAT!!!'. There isn't. 'Guessing' about anything from 'inside' the data = Deduction/Deductive Reasoning/Deductive Logic = fairly 'safe' procedure = (also) Interpolation. 'Guessing' about anything from 'outside' the data = Induction/Inductive Reasoning/Inductive Logic = slightly riskier procedure = (also) Extrapolation Example of Deductive Logic/Reasoning; Sign directly above two identical unmarked doors, saying 'Customer Restrooms'. Man exits 'left' door. Another man exits 'left' door. Person, with 'hoodie' up, leaves 'left' door. Fourth person, man, exits 'left' door. Deduction? Third person, of unknown gender, exiting 'left' door, was a man. Example of Inductive Logic/Reasoning (same scenario); 'Right' door is the 'ladies'. It really is just that simple.
Is inductive or deductive reasoning the best way to approach a geometric proof?
Please remember proof gives absolute truth, which means it HAS to be true for all cases satisfying the condition. Hence, inductive reasoning will NEVER be able to be used for that ---- it only supposes that the OBSERVED is true than the rest must, that's garbage, if it's observed of course it's true (in Math), no one knows what will come next. But it's a good place to start, inductive reasoning gives a person incentive to do a full proof. Do NOT confuse inductive reasoning with inductive proof. Inductive reasoning: If a1 is true, a2 is true, and a3 is true, than a4 should be true. Inductive Proof: If a1 is true (1), and for every an, a(n+1) is true as well (2), then, since a1 is true (1), then a2 is true (2), then a3 is true (2). You see, in inductive proof, there is a process of deductive reasoning ---- proving (1) and (2). (1) is usually, just plugin case 1. (2) provides only a generic condition, asking you to derive the result (a (n+1) being true), that is deductive reasoning. In other words, proof uses implications a cause b, and b cause c hence a cause c. Inductive says though a causes c because I saw one example of it.
What is the difference between deductive and subjective reasoning?
the difference between deductive and subjective reasoning is that deductive reasoning is a logical process in which a conclusion drawn from a set of premises contains no more information than the premises taken collectively. While subjective reasoning is drawn from past experience.
