2.2 Deductive and inductive reasoning in science
5 min read•july 30, 2024
Scientists use two key reasoning methods: deductive and inductive. starts with general principles to draw specific conclusions, while uses specific observations to make broader generalizations. Both are crucial for scientific progress.
In practice, these methods work together in a cycle. Inductive reasoning helps generate hypotheses from observations, while deductive reasoning tests those hypotheses by making predictions. This interplay drives scientific discovery and refines our understanding of the natural world.
Deductive vs Inductive Reasoning
Contrasting Deductive and Inductive Approaches
Top images from around the web for Contrasting Deductive and Inductive Approaches
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition 1 View original
Is this image relevant?
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition I View original
Is this image relevant?
The Science of Biology · Biology View original
Is this image relevant?
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition 1 View original
Is this image relevant?
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition I View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Contrasting Deductive and Inductive Approaches
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition 1 View original
Is this image relevant?
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition I View original
Is this image relevant?
The Science of Biology · Biology View original
Is this image relevant?
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition 1 View original
Is this image relevant?
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning | English Composition I View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
- Deductive reasoning is a top-down approach that starts with general principles or theories and uses them to draw specific conclusions
- Moves from the general to the specific (universal gravitation to predicting the orbit of a specific planet)
- Inductive reasoning is a bottom-up approach that starts with specific observations or data points and uses them to infer broader generalizations or theories
- Moves from the specific to the general (observing many black crows and concluding that all crows are black)
Certainty and Validity of Conclusions
- In deductive reasoning, if the premises are true and the logic is valid, then the must necessarily be true
- Deductive arguments are truth-preserving (the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion)
- In inductive reasoning, even if the premises are true, the conclusion is not guaranteed to be true, only probable to some degree
- Inductive arguments are ampliative - they add information not contained in the premises (inferring a general pattern from specific instances)
- Science utilizes both deductive and inductive reasoning in a continuous cycle
- Inductive reasoning generates hypotheses based on observations (noticing that animals with similar features tend to be related)
- Deductive reasoning makes predictions and tests those hypotheses (if evolution by common descent is true, then we should observe certain patterns of shared traits and DNA sequences)
Applying Deductive Reasoning
Valid Deductive Arguments
- In a valid deductive argument, the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises
- If the premises are true, the conclusion must be true (modus ponens: if P then Q; P; therefore Q)
- Deductive reasoning in science often takes the form of if-then statements (conditionals)
- If a scientific law states that X causes Y, and X is present, then we can deduce that Y will occur (if increasing greenhouse gas concentrations cause warming, and we increase greenhouse gases, then warming will occur)
Syllogisms and Logical Arguments
- Syllogisms are a common form of deductive argument consisting of a major , a minor premise, and a conclusion
- All metals conduct electricity (major premise)
- Copper is a metal (minor premise)
- Therefore, copper conducts electricity (conclusion)
- Mathematical proofs and logical arguments are examples of deductive reasoning
- The conclusions are certain, provided the axioms or premises are true and the reasoning is valid (proving a theorem in geometry based on axioms and definitions)
- Deductive reasoning is used in science to make specific predictions based on general theories or laws
- These predictions can then be tested empirically (using the laws of physics to predict the trajectory of a projectile, then measuring it)
Generating Hypotheses with Induction
Enumerative Induction and Analogical Reasoning
- Inductive reasoning involves drawing generalized conclusions from specific instances or observations
- It is the foundation of scientific hypothesis generation (observing many cases of finches with different beak shapes on different islands and hypothesizing that the differences are adaptations to different food sources)
- Inductive arguments in science typically take the form of - drawing a general conclusion from a number of specific instances
- Observing many white swans and concluding that all swans are white (which was later falsified by the discovery of black swans in Australia)
- involves drawing conclusions about a phenomenon based on its similarities to another phenomenon that is better understood
- Using our understanding of artificial selection to develop theories about natural selection (Darwin's analogy between selective breeding and evolution by natural selection)
Provisional Nature of Inductive Conclusions
- Hypotheses generated through inductive reasoning are provisional and subject to further testing and potential falsification
- They are not conclusively proven by the observations that led to their formation (Newton's law of universal gravitation was very successful but was later superseded by Einstein's general relativity)
- The strength of an inductive argument depends on factors such as:
- The number and diversity of instances observed (a conclusion based on a large and varied sample is more reliable than one based on a small or homogeneous sample)
- The plausibility of alternative explanations (a hypothesis is stronger if it is the best available explanation for the observations)
- The simplicity of the proposed generalization (Occam's razor: all else being equal, the simplest explanation is preferable)
Evaluating Reasoning in Science
Strengths and Limitations of Deductive Reasoning
- Deductive reasoning provides certainty in its conclusions, but only if the premises are true and the logic is valid
- Its usefulness depends on the of the theories and laws used as premises (deductions based on flawed theories will yield flawed conclusions)
- Deductive reasoning does not generate new empirical knowledge, but rather explores the implications of what is already known or assumed
- It is useful for making testable predictions (using the laws of inheritance to predict the outcomes of genetic crosses)
Strengths and Limitations of Inductive Reasoning
- Inductive reasoning allows for the generation of new hypotheses and theories based on empirical observations
- It is the source of scientific creativity and discovery (inducing the theory of plate tectonics from diverse geological evidence)
- However, inductive conclusions are always uncertain and provisional
- No matter how many positive instances are observed, the next instance could potentially contradict the generalization (concluding that all swans are white based on European observations, then discovering black swans in Australia)
- There is an inherent risk of overgeneralization or hasty generalization in inductive reasoning, especially when the sample of instances is small or biased
- Stereotyping and prejudice often result from faulty inductive reasoning (assuming that all members of a group share the characteristics of a few salient examples)
The Interplay of Deduction and Induction
- Both deductive and inductive reasoning are necessary in science, but neither is sufficient on its own
- Science progresses through a cycle of inductive hypothesis generation and deductive (inductively formulating a hypothesis based on observations, then deductively deriving predictions and testing them experimentally)
- Scientific conclusions are always tentative and subject to revision based on new evidence or better theories
- Even well-established scientific laws are not absolutely certain in the way that deductive conclusions are (Newton's laws were highly successful but were revised by relativity and quantum mechanics in light of new evidence)
- The provisional nature of science does not undermine its reliability or usefulness
- Scientific theories are the most reliable and powerful tools we have for understanding and predicting natural phenomena, even if they are not perfect or complete
Key Terms to Review (20)
Abductive Reasoning: Abductive reasoning is a logical process that starts with observations and seeks to find the simplest and most likely explanation for those observations. It is often used in scientific inquiry to formulate hypotheses based on available evidence, allowing scientists to make educated guesses that can then be tested further. This type of reasoning is crucial because it aids in generating new ideas and theories, linking closely with both deductive and inductive reasoning in understanding scientific concepts.
Analogical Induction: Analogical induction is a reasoning process that draws conclusions based on the similarities between two or more objects, events, or situations. It involves inferring that if two things are alike in one or more respects, they are likely to be alike in other respects as well. This type of reasoning is particularly useful in science for forming hypotheses and theories based on observed phenomena and their similarities to known cases.
Aristotle: Aristotle was an ancient Greek philosopher who made significant contributions to many fields, including logic, metaphysics, ethics, and natural sciences. His work laid the foundation for deductive reasoning and has influenced the scientific method, particularly through his emphasis on empirical observation and categorization of knowledge.
Bayesian Inference: Bayesian inference is a statistical method that applies Bayes' theorem to update the probability for a hypothesis as more evidence or information becomes available. This approach allows for a flexible understanding of uncertainty, making it useful for drawing conclusions from data and making predictions based on prior knowledge. Bayesian inference plays a significant role in reasoning processes, hypothesis testing, and establishing causal relationships in various scientific fields.
Causation: Causation refers to the relationship between events where one event (the cause) directly influences another event (the effect). Understanding causation is crucial in science as it allows researchers to establish connections between variables, facilitating the formulation of hypotheses and theories. This concept is essential for distinguishing between correlation and causation, as mere correlation does not imply a causal link.
Conclusion: A conclusion is a judgment or decision reached after considering evidence or reasoning. In the context of science, conclusions are drawn from either deductive or inductive reasoning processes, allowing scientists to make informed claims based on observations and logical analysis. Conclusions can either confirm or refute hypotheses and play a crucial role in the scientific method by guiding further research and inquiry.
Correlation: Correlation refers to a statistical relationship between two variables, indicating how one variable may change in relation to another. It is essential in understanding trends and patterns within data, helping scientists draw conclusions and make predictions based on observed relationships. Correlation does not imply causation; just because two variables are correlated does not mean one causes the other.
David Hume: David Hume was an 18th-century Scottish philosopher known for his influential works in empiricism and skepticism, particularly regarding the limits of human understanding and the nature of knowledge. His ideas challenged the concepts of causation, induction, and the status of scientific laws, significantly impacting the philosophy of science.
Deductive Reasoning: Deductive reasoning is a logical process in which a conclusion is drawn from a set of premises that are assumed to be true. It starts with a general statement or hypothesis and examines the possibilities to reach a specific, logical conclusion. This method is crucial in scientific inquiry as it allows researchers to formulate predictions and test them, making it essential for hypothesis formation and evaluation.
Enumerative Induction: Enumerative induction is a method of reasoning that involves drawing general conclusions based on a finite set of observations or instances. This approach is often used in science to make predictions or form theories, based on patterns observed in specific cases. It plays a key role in the empirical foundation of scientific inquiry, as it allows scientists to generalize findings and form hypotheses from collected data.
Falsifiability: Falsifiability is the principle that for a theory to be considered scientific, it must be able to be tested and potentially disproven by empirical evidence. This concept emphasizes the importance of observation and experimentation in science, ensuring that claims can be challenged and evaluated through rigorous methods.
Hypothesis Testing: Hypothesis testing is a statistical method used to make decisions about the validity of a claim or hypothesis based on observed data. This process involves formulating a null hypothesis and an alternative hypothesis, collecting data through observation and experimentation, and using statistical analysis to determine whether the evidence supports rejecting the null hypothesis in favor of the alternative. This method is crucial for making informed conclusions in scientific research and connects directly to the roles of reasoning and data analysis in scientific discovery.
Inductive Reasoning: Inductive reasoning is a method of reasoning in which general principles are derived from specific observations or instances. This type of reasoning plays a crucial role in forming hypotheses and theories in scientific inquiry, allowing scientists to make broader conclusions based on limited data while also leading to discussions about the reliability of such conclusions.
Popper's Criterion: Popper's Criterion, proposed by philosopher Karl Popper, states that for a theory to be considered scientific, it must be falsifiable, meaning it can be tested and potentially disproven by empirical observations. This criterion distinguishes scientific theories from non-scientific ones by emphasizing the importance of testability and the potential for refutation as core components of the scientific method.
Premise: A premise is a statement or proposition that serves as the foundation for an argument, providing the reasons or evidence that support a conclusion. In deductive reasoning, premises are used to guarantee the truth of the conclusion if the premises are true, while in inductive reasoning, premises provide evidence that increases the likelihood of the conclusion being true. Understanding premises is essential for evaluating the strength and validity of arguments in scientific reasoning.
Retroducive Reasoning: Retroducive reasoning is a form of logical inference that involves forming explanatory hypotheses based on observed phenomena or data, often starting from a conclusion and working backward to the premises that could support it. This type of reasoning is particularly useful in science for generating theories or models that can explain complex events or observations that are not easily accounted for by straightforward deductive or inductive reasoning.
Soundness: Soundness refers to a property of arguments, specifically in deductive reasoning, indicating that an argument is both valid and has true premises. When an argument is sound, it guarantees the truth of its conclusion; this means that not only does the structure of the argument logically lead from premises to conclusion, but the premises themselves are also accurate and factual.
Theory Development: Theory development is the process through which scientists construct, refine, and expand scientific theories based on observations, experiments, and evidence. This process is crucial in building a comprehensive understanding of phenomena, as it allows for the formulation of explanations that can be tested and validated through deductive and inductive reasoning.
Validity: Validity refers to the extent to which a conclusion, inference, or measurement accurately reflects the reality or truth of what it claims to represent. It is crucial in both deductive and inductive reasoning because it determines whether arguments or hypotheses are logically sound and appropriately applied. Validity helps establish the credibility of scientific inquiry and methodology, ensuring that findings and conclusions drawn from research are trustworthy and meaningful.
Verification: Verification is the process of confirming the accuracy and truthfulness of a statement or hypothesis through observation, experimentation, or logical reasoning. This concept is essential in evaluating scientific claims, as it ensures that theories and hypotheses are substantiated by empirical evidence. The practice of verification serves as a foundation for building reliable knowledge in science, facilitating the distinction between scientifically valid assertions and those that are unsubstantiated.