You are on page 1of 34

# Deductive and Inductive

Reasoning
Problem Solving
Logic The science of correct
reasoning.
Reasoning The drawing of
inferences or conclusions from known
or assumed facts.
When solving a problem, one must
understand the question, gather all
pertinent facts, analyze the problem
i.e. compare with previous problems
(note similarities and differences),
perhaps use pictures or formulas to
solve the problem.
Deductive vs. Inductive
Reasoning
The difference:
inductive reasoning uses patterns to
arrive at a conclusion (conjecture)

deductive reasoning uses facts, rules,
definitions or properties to arrive at a
conclusion.
Examples of Inductive Reasoning

1) Every quiz has been easy.
Therefore, the test will be easy.
2) The teacher used PowerPoint in the
last few classes. Therefore, the
teacher will use PowerPoint
tomorrow.
3) Every fall there have been hurricanes
in the tropics. Therefore, there will be
hurricanes in the tropics this coming
fall.
Example of Deductive Reasoning
The catalog states that all entering
freshmen must take a mathematics
placement test.
Conclusion: You will have to take a
mathematics placement test.
You are an entering freshman.
An Example:
Inductive or Deductive Reasoning?
Geometry example

60

x
Triangle sum property - the
sum of the angles of any
triangle is always 180
degrees.
Therefore, angle x = 30
Inductive or Deductive Reasoning?
Geometry example

Deductive Reasoning
This method of reasoning produces
results that are certain within the
logical system being developed.
It involves reaching a conclusion by
using a formal structure based on a
set of undefined terms and a set of
accepted unproved axioms or
premises.
The conclusions are said to be
proved and are called theorems.
Deductive Reasoning
Deductive Reasoning A type of
logic in which one goes from a general
statement to a specific instance.
The classic example
All men are mortal. (major premise)
Socrates is a man. (minor premise)
Therefore, Socrates is mortal. (conclusion)
The above is an example of a
syllogism.
Deductive Reasoning
Syllogism: An argument composed of two
statements or premises (the major and
minor premises), followed by a conclusion.
For any given set of premises, if the
conclusion is guaranteed, the arguments is
said to be valid.
If the conclusion is not guaranteed (at least
one instance in which the conclusion does
not follow), the argument is said to be
invalid.
BE CARFEUL, DO NOT CONFUSE
TRUTH WITH VALIDITY!
Deductive Reasoning
Examples:
1. All students eat pizza.
Claire is a student at CSULB.
Therefore, Claire eats pizza.

2. All athletes work out in the gym.
Barry Bonds is an athlete.
Therefore, Barry Bonds works out in the
gym.
Deductive Reasoning
Examples:
1. All students eat pizza.
Claire is a student at wmhs.
Therefore, Claire eats pizza.

2. All athletes work out in the gym.
Lebron James is an athlete.
Therefore, Lebron James works out in the
gym.
Deductive Reasoning
3. All math teachers are over 7 feet tall.
Mr. P is a math teacher.
Therefore, Mr. P is over 7 feet tall.
The argument is valid, but is certainly not
true.
The above examples are of the form
If p, then q. (major premise)
x is p. (minor premise)
Therefore, x is q. (conclusion)
Venn Diagrams
Venn Diagram: A diagram consisting of various
overlapping figures contained in a rectangle called
the universe.
U

This is an example of all A are B. (If A, then B.)

B
A
Venn Diagrams
This is an example of some A are B.
(At least one A is B.)

The yellow oval is A, the blue oval is B.
Example
Construct a Venn Diagram to
determine the validity of the given
argument.

#14 All smiling cats talk.
The Cheshire Cat smiles.
Therefore, the Cheshire Cat talks.

VALID OR INVALID???
Example
Valid argument; x is Cheshire Cat

Things
that talk

Smiling cats

x

Examples
#6 No one who can afford health
insurance is unemployed.
All politicians can afford health
insurance.
Therefore, no politician is unemployed.

VALID OR INVALID?????
Examples
X=politician. The argument is valid.

People who can afford
Health Care.
Politicians
X
Unemployed
Example
#16 Some professors wear glasses.
Mr. Einstein wears glasses.
Therefore, Mr. Einstein is a professor.
Let the yellow oval be professors, and the
blue oval be glass wearers. Then x (Mr.
Einstein) is in the blue oval, but not in the
overlapping region. The argument is
invalid.

x
Inductive Reasoning
Inductive Reasoning, involves going
from a series of specific cases to a
general statement. The conclusion in
an inductive argument is never
guaranteed.

Example: What is the next number in
the sequence 6, 13, 20, 27,
There is more than one correct answer.
Inductive Reasoning
Heres the sequence again 6, 13, 20, 27,
Look at the difference of each term.
13 6 = 7, 20 13 = 7, 27 20 = 7
Thus the next term is 34, because 34 27 =
7.
However what if the sequence represents
the dates. Then the next number could be 3
(31 days in a month).
The next number could be 4 (30 day month)
Or it could be 5 (29 day month Feb. Leap
year)
Or even 6 (28 day month Feb.)
All bats are mammals.
All mammals are warm-blooded.
So, all bats are warm-blooded.

All arguments are deductive or inductive.
Deductive arguments are arguments in which the conclusion is claimed
or intended to follow necessarily from the premises.
Inductive arguments are arguments in which the conclusion is
claimed or intended to follow probably from the premises.
Is the argument above deductive or inductive?
All bats are mammals.
All mammals are warm-blooded.
So, all bats are warm-blooded.

If the premises are true, the conclusion, logically, must also be true.

Deductive.
Kristin is a law student.
Most law students own laptops.
So, probably Kristin owns a laptop.

In the example above, the word probably shows that
the argument is inductive.

No Texans are architects.
No architects are Democrats.
So, no Texans are Democrats.

Either Kurt voted in the last election, or he didn't.
Only citizens can vote.
Kurt is not, and has never been, a citizen.
So, Kurt didn't vote in the last election.
Arguments by elimination are arguments that seek to logically rule
out various possibilities until only a single possibility remains.
Arguments of this type are always deductive.
Tess: Are there any good Italian restaurants in town?

Don: Yeah, Luigi's is pretty good. I've had their
Neapolitan rigatoni, their lasagne col pesto, and their
mushroom ravioli. I don't think you can go wrong with
any of their pasta dishes.

Based on what you've learned, is this argument deductive
or inductive? How can you tell?

Don: Yeah, Luigi's is pretty good. I've had their Neapolitan
rigatoni, their lasagne col pesto, and their mushroom ravioli.
I don't think you can go wrong with any of their pasta
dishes.

Inductive.
I wonder if I have enough cash to buy my psychology
textbook as well as my biology and history textbooks. Let's
see, I have \$200. My biology textbook costs \$65 and my
history textbook costs \$52. My psychology textbook costs
\$60. With taxes, that should come to about \$190. Yep, I have
enough.

Is this argument deductive or inductive? How can you tell?

Mother: Don't give Billy that brownie. It contains walnuts, and I think
Billy is allergic to walnuts. Last week he ate some oatmeal cookies with
walnuts and he broke out in a severe rash.

Father: Billy isn't allergic to walnuts. Don't you remember he ate some
walnut fudge ice cream at Melissa's birthday party last spring? He didn't
have any allergic reaction then.

Is the father's argument deductive or inductive? How can you tell?